Clado, Mary Clarisse M.

Argumentation &Debate

BABRC 2-1 Ms. Ann Clarisse De Leon

1. Research about brief History of Debate. (Greek-English-Philippines)

GREEK

Debate, the art of convincing by a combination of discussion, argumentation

and persuasion, has its roots deep in the heart of Western civilization. Throughout
its history, debate has thrived best in a democratic climate. In order for reasoned
argument to exist there has to be agreement that nobody is going to get his head
chopped off for disagreeing.

It is the Greeks who usually get the credit for starting the practice. The title
"father of debate" is usually given to the Greek teacher Protagoras of
Abdera (c. 481-411 B.C.), who taught at Athens. Two of his most famous
statements that survive are "Man is the measure of all things" and "There are two
sides to every question." That it was necessary for men to seek knowledge and ask
questions was at the heart of Protagoras's thought.

Protagoras liked to get his students stirred up. Many were thrilled by his style and
the great teacher made a lot of money as students flocked to his classes. But not
everyone was happy. One can imagine an Athenian father wondering why he was
laying out all those drachmas only to end up with a son who argued with him at
dinner.

Eventually the good citizens of Athens decided that there were some things, like the
gods, that were not open to debate. They burned Protagoras's works in public and
told him never to come back to Athens.

Whatever their feelings about Protagoras, the Greeks still loved to hear the give
and take of a good argument. It was practiced in their law courts and governmental
system. Skilled speakers could bring out the crowds for a trial.

Perhaps the most popular Greek orator of the day was Demosthenes (384-322
B.C.). Far from being a natural speaker, he had a lisp and suffered from breathing
problems. This Athenian overcame them by practicing his declamation with pebbles
in his mouth.

The Romans took over the Greek tradition and expanded on it. The law courts, the
assembly and the senate were all debating grounds. Young Roman men of a certain
class were required to learn how to support an argument or skillfully dispute one.
The best orator of the Roman world was Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.).

A lawyer-politician, Cicero's polished style was already swaying juries before he was
30. In 62 B.C., Cicero's withering attacks on the conspiracy to overthrow the state
led by a Roman noble named Catiline were hailed as masterpieces. Cicero's books
on rhetoric were copied and have been used by generations of students.

The Middle Ages changed the focus of debate. Philosophy and religion had replaced
politics as major topics. Methods of logic and argument based on the great Greek
and Roman writers were carried to higher realms. Public debates in Latin were held
in universities all over Europe. Although they sometimes focused on obscure, how-
many-angels-can-dance-on-the-

head-of-a-pin topics, others dealt with weighty fare like the nature of being.

It was with the Age of Reason in the 18th century that political debate revived.
Leading the way was the "mother of parliaments" in England. Bred in the classics,
the lords and gentlemen felt they were in line with the great traditions of Greece
and Rome. They were fond of throwing their fonts of Latin at each other. It was at
least part of this tradition that came across the Atlantic to America's legislative
bodies and the U.S. Congress.

ENGLISH

Lincoln-Douglas debating is primarily a form of UnitedStates high school

debate named after the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas-debates. It is a one-on-one event
focused mainly on applying philosophical theories to real world issues. Debaters
normally alternate sides from round to round as either the "affirmative", which
upholds the resolution, or "negative", which attacks it. The resolution, which
changes bimonthly, asks whether a certain policy or action conforms to a specific
value.

Though established as an alternative to policy debate, there has been a strong

movement to embrace certain techniques that originated in policy debate (and,
correspondingly, a strong backlash movement). Plans, counterplans, critical theory,
postmodern theory, debate about the theoretical basis and rules of the activity
itself, and critics have all reached more than occasional, if not yet universal, usage.
Traditional L-D debate attempts to be free of policy debate "jargon". Lincoln-
Douglas speeches can range from a conversational pace to well over 300 words per
minute (when trying to maximize the number of arguments and depth of each
argument's development). This technique is known as spreading. There is also a
growing emphasis on carded evidence, though still much less than in policy debate.
These trends have created a serious rift within the activity between the debaters,
judges, and coaches who advocate or accept these changes, and those who
vehemently oppose them.
Policy and Lincoln-Douglas debate tournaments are often held concurrently at the
same school or organization. One organization that offers Lincoln-Douglas debate is
NCFCA

Once the Kennedy-Nixon series were held, though, the concept of

presidential debates took off like a rocket. The public began to expect debate
between candidates; DEBATES BECAME AN AMERICAN INSTITUTION. With all
of the weight debates now carried, they could also be construed as lightning in a
bottle. To Nixon and other candidates who followed, the bottle had to be safely
capped. Lyndon Johnson turned down requests to debate in 1964, as did Nixon in
the 1968 campaign. Once elected, Nixon used his presidential veto power to
override a bill that repealed the equal time provision of the Communications Act of
1934.

This law required that candidates in national elections must have equal exposure in
the media. During the 20th century, candidates used the equal time provision to
their advantage. By refusing to debate, any candidate could effectively cripple a
proposed debate. Certainly, there was a measure of bad press associated with
turning down an invitation to debate. But bad press is better than
bad television exposure any day of the week, as the Nixon showing in 1960 had
taught. Furthermore, exploiting the equal time provision became a tool favored by
front-runners in an election cycle. Bad press from a refusal to debate is far
outweighed by the potential harm provided by debating a rival candidate who may
have a good showing and possibly sway millions of voters.

Exploiting debates and the debate process looked like it might get out of hand in
the 1960s and '70s, until the LWV stepped in to take the reigns of the political
process away from campaign strategists. The organization would have a renewed
positive impact on presidential races for eight years. In 1988, the Commission on
Presidential Debates (CPD) took over and became the only organization capable of
legitimately hosting presidential debates. Other debates, held before the candidates
are nominated at the conventions, are hosted by news agencies and television
networks and aren't official presidential debates. The CPD oversees height
requirements for podiums, room temperature at debate halls, chooses moderators
and serves as a propaganda arm for both the Republican and Democratic parties.
The creation of the CPD ultimately tolled the death of spontaneity in presidential
debates.

 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
 Parliamentary debate on the American Revolution, that Pitt the Elder died of
exhaustion while making a speech on behalf of the Revolutionaries.
 In 1858, the debates for an Illinois Senate seat between Abraham Lincoln
and Stephen Douglas were famed for their skill and ability to get to the heart
of the argument. They have in turn inspired a whole type of modern
debating.
 In the 1960 Presidential election, debates were used for the first time
between the two challengers- and they were televised. Famously, those who
listened to the radio thought Richard Nixon had won, while those who
watched on television believed the more charismatic John Kennedy had won.
Kennedy's election victory is often attributed to his performances in these
debates.

PHILIPPINES

Balagtasan is a form of debate using poetic verse. The name of the literary
form itself originates from Francisco Balagtas, a hugely influential Filipino poet from
the late 1800’s. While both the formation of the balagtasan and the man in which it
is named after are slightly outside the scope of our archeological investigation, it is
still very significant because many of the events of the early 1900’s helped to shape
the form into what it is today.

Francisco Baltazar (popularly known as Francisco Balagtas) was born on April

2, 1788 in Bigaa, Bulacan. He learned how to write poetry from another famous
Filipino poet, José de la Cruz. Because of him, Balagtas was constantly pushed to
develop and progress his writing. Considered the Filipino version of William
Shakespeare, most of his early works were, like Shakespeare, comedies. Also like
Shakespeare, his work gradually matured over time; Balagtas’ masterpiece
entitled Florante at Laura is an epic written when he was imprisoned during the
19thcentury.

This high regard given to Balagtas is the reason why the poetic form, balagtasan, is
given its name. As stated before, the name of the form itself was coined outside
the range of our research; however the turmoil happening from the early 1900’s
were influential in creating the literary form as it is today. Balagtasan came about,
at least politically, as the manifestation of Filipino sentiment in that a sense of self
and identity was lost due to American rule. It strives to declare independence from
America by highlighting Filipino culture such as their old customs and traditions.

Regarding the actual performance, Balagtasan consists of three speakers: a

narrator, a male, and a woman. The three interact with each other in the form of a
“debate.” Each speaker takes turns reciting lines in poetic rhyme in which the next
speaker will respond to. The topics are primarily political in nature, dealing mostly
with Filipino nationalism and the renouncement of American ways. Comedy can be
injected into the performance as well; witty retorts are commonplace in balagtasan.

Regarding the actual performance, Balagtasan consists of three speakers: a

narrator, a male, and a woman. The three interact with each other in the form of a
“debate.” Each speaker takes turns reciting lines in poetic rhyme in which the next
speaker will respond to. The topics are primarily political in nature, dealing mostly
with Filipino nationalism and the renouncement of American ways. Comedy can be
injected into the performance as well; witty retorts are commonplace in balagtasan.

2. Father of Debate
 PROTAGORAS OF ABDERA
thinker and teacher, the first and most famous of the Greek
Sophists. Protagoras spent most of his life at Athens, where he
considerably influenced contemporary thought on moral and
political questions.

Other prominent people related to Debate

 PLATO
The man who arguably began the concept of the debate, Plato
was a fine writer and philosopher and makes up a trio with
Aristotle and Socrates. Many of his ‘dialogues’• are in written
form and address specific issues brought up with other Greek
thinkers. He is most famous for the Gorgias Dialogue in which
he seeks the true definition of rhetoric ‘ one of the key principles
in the debating process. He also critiques Athenian oratory in
the text.
 MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO
The Roman Republic’s greatest orator and one of the figures so
influential in understanding political thought of the era, he gave
a series of speeches to the Roman Senate denouncing Catiline ‘
a man attempting to be elected to the consulship. It was
believed by Cicero and others that Catiline would seize control of
the government. Catiline had tried to bribe and bully his way to
the top leading Cicero to denounce him in public. The vote that
resulted from Cicero’s speeches (Catiline Orations) led to
Cicero’s immediate (and temporary) election to Dictator until
the crisis was solved.
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Going down as one of the greatest US Presidents of all time,
Lincoln’s very public and vocal opposition to the expansion of
slavery resulted in a series of seven debates in 1858 with
Stephen Douglas. It must be noted at this time that Lincoln was
not yet an abolitionist ‘ but his success in the debates would be
responsible for his nomination to the Presidency. He would go
on to be the President that would oversee a civil war and enact
the abolition before his assassination in 1865.
 NELSON MANDELA
Long before his activism, 27-year imprisonment and
historical election, former South African president Nelson
Mandela debated whilst attending college. The rhetorical
and forensic skills gleaned during this time greatly
benefited him when dismantling the horrifying apartheid
plaguing his nation. During his time in office, Mandela
encouraged debate as essential to the democratic process.
These days, though, audiences tend to know him more for
his speeches, essays and memoirs when it comes to
understanding his views.
 MOHANDAS GHANDI
While India struggled against its British oppressors,
revolutionaries Mohandas Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore
frequently found themselves debating politics, religion and
culture. Both men desired their nation’s freedom and the
demolishing of its rigid caste system, but departed when it came
to execution. A lawyer by training, Gandhi’s way with words
inspired an entire region to rise up and overthrow a crushing
regime without any violence whatsoever, a concept he picked up
in South Africa and introduced to the American Civil Rights
Movement.
 THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY
Nicknamed ‘Darwin’s Bulldog’• for being the strong arm of the
emerging evolution movement, Huxley was the man who
pressured Darwin into publishing his work. He is most famous
for one debate in particular: the 1860 formal debate with
Samuel Wilberforce. He argued so convincingly for the descent
of man through evolution of natural selection, that many
observers believed that the sudden uptake was purely as a
result of that. Any credibility Wilberforce might have had went
 out of the window when he sarcastically asked if Huxley was
descended from monkeys on his mother’s or father’s side.
 MARGARETH THATCHER
Even today, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
still sparks a right fair amount of controversy, but that doesn’t
mean she isn’t necessarily unworthy of study and consideration.
While attending Oxford, Margaret Thatcher served as president
of the university’s Conservative Association and debated politics
and economics. As with many politicians listed here, her
experiences certainly helped her rise through the hierarchy
before serving as Prime Minister from 1979 to 1990.

3. What is Argumentation?
 Argumentation is the process of forming reasons, justifying
beliefs, and drawing conclusions with the aim of influencing the
thoughts and/or actions of others.
 Argumentation also refers to the study of that process.
Argumentation is an interdisciplinary field of study and a central
concern of researchers in the disciplines of logic, dialectic, and
rhetoric.
 The noun ‘argument’ means in technical terms statements,
reasoning or evidence presented by someone in written or
spoken form that support something, such as a particular
opinion.

4. What is debate?
 A debate is an organized argument or contest of ideas in which
the participants discuss a topic from two opposing sides. Those
who agree with this statement or idea are the "Pro" side. Those
who will not agree with this statement or idea are the "Con"
side. Each side will show in an organized and clever way why
they believe to have the right answers. They will use examples
and evidence to support their ideas while working towards a
conclusion.

The aim of a debate is to convince the opposition that you are

right. When the two sides agree on the subject or when one
side's arguments are more convincing than the other side that is
when the debate comes to a close. In a formal debate, a
mediator (a person that has not agreed with the Pro or the Con)
 will decide who the winner should be. In an informal debate the
argument can continue until the time when one side gives up.
 A ‘debate’, as a noun, is understood as a formal discussion
between people or groups of people that is regulated.

ARE THEY THE SAME?

 No, because an argument can be defined as an opinion that is

supported with evidence. Debates are based upon arguments. A
formal debate usually takes place in a formal setting with a team
representing each side of the argument. Specific guidelines are
followed, and the debate is usually judged.
 Both words suggest exchange of opposing views and disagreement.
They do have similar meanings, but the word "debate" is used for
formal situations eg social or political debates. You don't refer to a
family argument as a "debate"

5. Basic Elements of Argumentation

1) The Premise - why should your assertion should be accepted?

Definition - a 'premise' is any statement which acts as the reason or

evidence to support a conclusion.

Evidence: facts, statistics, data, authoritative opinion.

Appeal: the interpretation of evidence

2) The Conclusion - the proven form of the thesis, or what follows

from, or is supported by the evidence.

Definition - a 'conclusion' is any statement which is supported by a

premise or premises.

Example:
Self defense is a basic human right. - premise
Therefore, everyone should carry a handgun. – conclusion

Elements of Debate

 ANALYSIS: Identifying and arguing the major issues of the

debate, with points also considered for effectiveness of cross-
examination.
  REASONING: Effectively creating clash by arguing and
presenting one side of the debate, extending an argument,
turning the opponent's arguments against them, exposing faulty
logic and extending an argument based on a major item of
evidence.
 EVIDENCE: Quality of sources, applying the evidence to a
specific argument, using evidence to support major arguments,
showing how well the evidence is understood.
 ORGANIZATION: Structure of the spoken presentation. For
example, the introduction, the arguments and summary. How
the tone followed the flow of the debate. Was the presentation
coherent and how effectively was time utilized.
 REFUTATION: Effectively weakening the opponent's
arguments, creating clash and addressing all arguments in the
debate.
 DELIVERY: Vocal clarity, correct pronunciation, poise,
gestures, eye contact, projection of personality, sentence
structure and grammar.

6. Characteristics of Argumentation
1. Development, through which arguments are advanced and
supported;
2. Clash, through which arguments are properly disputed;
3. Extension, through which arguments are defended against
refutation; and
4. Perspective, through which individual arguments are related to the
larger question at hand

Characteristic of Debate
1. Informative- a good debate presents complete information and
factual setting. Debate is supposed to inform the public of what they should
know, to educate the people, and to help them reach a logical understanding
of the facts. Debaters should feed the audience the necessary facts and
evidence to will properly aid the latter in learning, grasping and appreciating
the novelty of the motion. Debaters should not rely merely on their own
opinions but on the general principles laid down by the authorities and
experts.

2. Well-reasoned- arguments raised in a debate must be logical,

relevant, competent and well explained. Arguments must show a direct link
on the motion that is debated upon. Arguments must support the core that
will aid the team prove their claims. Arguments raised must be acceptable to
an average reasonable person who has an average analysis of the issues
presented. All questions that will lead to the conclusion of the debate must
be clarified, answered, and analyzed. Debaters should make all their points
clear and understandable.

3. Persuasive- Debate should give emphasis and force to strong

arguments that need the support of the people. In order to convince the
people in the position that debaters are supporting, debaters must be firy in
presenting their issues. Debaters should build rapport with their audience
and help them follow the points raised by the debaters.

4. Orderly- A debate must follow a certain format that will govern the
proceeding of the debate and the conduct of the debaters. The rules should
among others set the task of each speaker and the time limit alloted to each
of them. Speeches must be organized, structured and presented in a
methodological form.

5. Dynamic- Since in a debate, two teams present opposing views,

said views must be responded to by both teams respectively. All important
points must be questioned and answered by each team and teams must
directly clash with the points raised by their opponent. Each speaker must
contribute and respond to the requirements and necessities of the debate.