chapter 1 nature of debate

The Nature of Debate Chapter 1

CA 120

Debate and Argumentation

Brief History of Debating

With the desire to interact with other humans, also came the need to voice out his views that, conceivably, may be opposed to another’s. Thus debate was born

Origin of educational debates can be traced to ancient Greece

Protagoras of Abdera (481-411 BC)“Father of Debate”

first to organize argumentative contests

among his pupils by inventing themes that

they could oppose or defend.


During the Classical and Medieval Ages, Latin was the language used

Greek and Roman students were trained through dialectic (debate by question and answer

Dialectic was foremost among the seven liberal arts


Early 1400s- first recorded intercollegiate argumentative contest was held between England’s Cambridge and Oxford

Oxford Union Society- oldest and most prestigious debate society in the world. Some members became Prime Minister of Great Britain and other countries

In 1892- Harvard-Yale match was first held which began intercollegiate debating in the United States

Early competitions lasted about two hours-with both sides delivering prepared and memorized speeches-but ended with no formal winner

Debating in the Philippines

The Philippines has its own colorful history of verbal argumentation

The ancient Balagtasan is by itself a unique form of debate with the speeches done on the spot in rhyming verse

During the American period, American teachers were said to have introduced Forensic Debating.

This would be later be known as Oregon-Oxford format after the two schools which popularized it


In 1928, UP sent a four-man debating team coached by Prof. Carlos P. Romulo (later Chairman of UN General Assembly) to tour US universities

Team won against every American school (14 in all including Stanford, Cornell, and Harvard)


National Collegiate Forensic League (NACFOL), formed in 1962, was the first national organization to foster inter-school debate tournaments in the country

During Martial Law, conducts of debates were curtailed

In 1986, NACFOL was revived and renamed National Collegiate Debate League (NCDL)

In 1994, NCDL sponsored National Collegiate Debate Finals which saw UP Diliman Debate Team winning the Fidel V Ramos Trophy. Championship round was televised on People’s Television Network


In the 1999s, several Philippine universities were invited to World Debate Council to participate in the World Debating Championships

UP Debate Society and Ateneo Debate Society jointly founded the Philippine Parliamentary Debate Union (PPDU) in 1994.

PPDU formally introduced Parliamentary format to Filipino debaters through a series of seminars


De La Salle University and University of Santo Tomas have hosted the All Asians and Australasians Debating Championships

Ateneo and University of Santo Tomas have won the All Asian Inter-Varsity Debating Championships

World Universities Debating Championships (aka the Worlds)

Held since 1977 and is considered the Mecca of debating world


In the past, four Philippine schools (UP, Ateneo, UST and La Salle) have qualified for ESL championship round

1998, UP hosted the first National Debate Master’s Classic to search for the country’s top debaters


In 1999, Worlds came to Manila as Ateneo won the bid to host. It was first Asian country to host the Worlds.

In 2012, Manila again hosted the Worlds with La Salle hosting

Nature of Debate

“The only noble excuse for debate is the search for the truth; for debate seeks the truth, the truth to move ourselves and our society”

-Claro M. Recto

Nature of Debate

Among the Greeks, the art of argumentation-called rhetorike (rhetoric)- was an essential part of liberal education. It has the power to persuade but also served society.

In authoritarian society, there is no need for debate since public policies are not open to discussion. Worse, those who insist on debating are sent to jail or shot.

Democratic societies such as ours need debate.

Nature of Debate

Walter Lippman said that we need debate, we need to hear the opinion of others because “freedom of discussion improve our own opinions.”

Debate is a means to an end; to find truth or arrive at the right policy.

In our Congress today, there is a long process of debate perhaps even too much debate- before any bill becomes a law (eg. RH Law, FOI bill etc).

In a free and democratic society, citizens prefer debate over killing. Through venting and confrontation of opinion-and the resolution of conflict through reasoning-we find no necessity to do violence on another.

Debating Defined

Formal, direct, oral contest in argumentation between two or more teams on a definite issue at a set time.

Argumentation- occurs in debate

the art of influencing others through the medium of reasoned discourse, to believe or to act as we wish them to act.” (O’Neill, Laycock, and Scales 1928).

Debating Defined

Jefrrey Auer (debate should have these elements):

A confrontation

In equal and adequate time

Of matched contestants

On a Stated proposition

To gain a decision

It may refer to any school debate or argument process (presidential debate, etc)

Based on main definition, a debate therefore should have a set of rules that govern its conduct (formal). Shall be face-to-face (direct),shall involve the use of speeches (oral), between two opposing sides (represented by the two or more teams), and shall involve only one issues on a scheduled time.

Debating Defined

Debate is essentially argumentation under specific rules (Wood and Goodnight, 1989). These rules have been constant since academic debate began:

Time limit are provided;

The debate is conducted under parliamentary rules;

To ensure fairness, each side has an equal numbers of speakers and an equal amount of time;

Both sides are allowed equal opportunity in rebuttal;

At the conclusion, decision is taken on the merits of the question.

Sometimes, due to advances in technology, debates no longer needed face-to-face interaction.

Functions of Debate

1)Debate as Means for ChangeCicero: The true aim of forensic oratory is threefold: to inform, to entertain, and to move.

Debate is a weapon to move armies, to crystallize public opinion, to influence development of society. It is a means to an end.

Functions of Debate

2) Debate as Advocacy

Forum for developing skills of advocacy

It is an opportunity to learn new ideas in the atmosphere of self and mutual respect

3) Debate as an Educational Tool

Debate has provided an excellent means of meeting these educational goals. Debates conducted within campuses have contributed to a better understanding of our society

Benefits of Debate

Important Skills Learned (National Inter-Varsity Handouts, 1995)

1) Leadership Skills

2) Analysis

3) Critical Thinking

4) Open-Mindedness

5) Thinking on Your Feet

6) Organization

7) Listening

8) Self-Confidence

9) Team-work and Cooperation

Formats of Debate

Two Major Format in the Philippines1) Cross-Examination (known as Oxford-Oregon)

2)Parliamentary Debating (with several strains)

A) British

B) American

C) Australasian

D) Asian

Formats of DebateOther Formats

1) Lincoln-Douglas DebateTwo-Man debates and usually used during US presidential elections (Kennedy and Nixon in 1960)

Named after two Americans Lincoln and Douglas

Formats of Debate Douglas-Lincoln

Nixon-Kennedy Debate (1960)

Formats of Debate Douglas-Lincoln

Order of SpeakersAffirmative Presentation Speech

Negative Presentation Speech

Affirmative Rebuttal Speech

Negative Rebuttal Speech

Affirmative Summary Speech

Negative Summary Speech

Formats of DebateRebuttal Debate

2) Rebuttal debateSimilar to Cross-Examination Debate

Provides 2-3 debaters per side.

Modified Oxford-Oregon

Formats of DebateRebuttal Debate

Order of SpeakersFirst Affirmative Constructive Speech

First Negative Constructive Speech

Second Affirmative Constructive Speech

Second Negative Constructive Speech

First Negative Rebuttal

First Affirmative Rebuttal

Second Negative Rebuttal

Second Affirmative Rebuttal

Formats of DebateMoot Court

3) Moot CourtAims to simulate court-room trial procedures

It uses witnesses and evidence to prove a case

Debaters are allowed to interact with each other through interpellation portion of the first round of speeches

Issuance of objections and motions to the direct/cross-examiner during second round of speeches


There are three (3) speakers and one scribe for each team.

Duties:1st Affirmative Speaker- set the parameters of their case, forward the substantial arguments relevant to their case, destroy the 1st speaker of negatives side’s points through interpellation.


Duties:1st Negative Speaker- rebut the case of 1st Affirmative speaker, prove their case, and destroy the 1st speakers points through interpellation.

Examiners for both teams- ask questions and solicit responses from the witness that will establish or prove team’s case during direct examination, and lay doubt on the witness’ credibility and/or testimony during cross-examination


Duties:Rebuttal speakers- demolish the opposing team’s case, and rebuild team’s case

Scribe- provide the judges an abstract or a conceptual summary of team’s case


List of common objections:1) Badgering the Witness- when the cross-examiner refuses to give witness time to respond questions; when cross-examiner harasses/discriminates the witness

2) Kilometric Questions- when the cross-examiner asks many questions without giving the witness ample time to reply


List of common objections:3) Immaterial/Irrelevant- when the witness’ statement deemed unimportant, inconsequential by the opposing team

4) Hostile Witness- when the witness refuse to respond to a properly phrased questions; when the witness tries to pick a fight with the cross-examiner; when the witness shows unwarranted aggression towards the cross-examiner;


List of common objections:5) Leading- when the direct examiner asks categorical questions leading to a desired answer (not coached out from witness)

6) Argumentative- cross-examiner argues with the witness


Order of Speakers:Constructive speech by 1st Affirmative speaker- 7-8 minutes

Interpellation by 1st Negative speaker- 3-4 minutes

Constructive speech by 1st Negative speaker- 7-8 minutes

Interpellation by 1st Affirmative speaker- 3-4 minutes


Order of Speakers:Direct Examination by 2nd Affirmative speaker- 3-4 minutes

Cross Examination by 2nd Negative speaker- 3-4 minutes

Direct Examination by 2nd Negative speaker- 3-4 minutes

Cross Examination by 2nd Affirmative speaker- 3-4 minutes


Order of Speakers:Rebuttal Speech by 3rd Negative speaker- 7-8 minutes

Rebuttal Speech by 3rd Affirmative speaker - 7-8 minutes


Moot Court or Mock Trials are really legal argumentation.

Examples are the Jessup Moot Court between UP-Ateneo Law where both sides employ written argumentation or briefs called memorials on a question of law.

Panel of jurists hear the cases and decide which side has legal merit.

chapter 1 nature of debate

Documents

dialectic debate

bcfather of debate

ateneo debate society

prestigious debate society

world debate council

diliman debate team

unique form of debate

nature of debate chapter