The theory and practice of argumentation and debateThe object of this book is to furnish practical directions for the preparation and presentation of oral and written arguments. Teachers of Argumentation and Debate have come to realize that interest can best be stimulated and practical results best secured by omitting the theoretical forms of reasoning at first, and leading the student directly to the actual work of building up an argument. The technical name of a logical process has little to do with its practical application. This fact is well illustrated by the constant use of arguments in our conversation: moreover, the student who enters upon this work is sufficiently advanced to appreciate the difference between truth and error. For these reasons, the book is divided into two parts, the first of which deals with the Practice of Argumentation and Debate. After the student has had some experience in constructing and presenting arguments he is better fitted to make practical application of the theoretical principles of argumentation which are presented in the second part of this book under the head of the Theory of Argumentation and Debate. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 26
Page
... affirmative. This order gives the closing speech to the affirmative. Practice in this kind of formal debate should go hand in hand with the study of the text after the first five chapters have been mastered . The first arguments ...
... affirmative. This order gives the closing speech to the affirmative. Practice in this kind of formal debate should go hand in hand with the study of the text after the first five chapters have been mastered . The first arguments ...
Page
... affirmative. The first argument is always presented by the affirmative. Upon the affirmative rests the burden of proof and if the affirmative proves nothing the decision goes to the negative. “He who affirms must prove.” The affirmative ...
... affirmative. The first argument is always presented by the affirmative. Upon the affirmative rests the burden of proof and if the affirmative proves nothing the decision goes to the negative. “He who affirms must prove.” The affirmative ...
Page
... affirmative and the negative, and this meaning must be absolutely clear and unambiguous. 4. The proposition should be worded as briefly and simply as is consistent with the foregoing requirements. After the proposition has been worded ...
... affirmative and the negative, and this meaning must be absolutely clear and unambiguous. 4. The proposition should be worded as briefly and simply as is consistent with the foregoing requirements. After the proposition has been worded ...
Page
... affirmative. 3. The proposition should contain no ambiguous words. 4. The proposition should be worded as briefly and simply as is consistent with the foregoing rules. EXERCISES IN SELECTING AND PHRASING THE PROPOSITION 1. Write out ...
... affirmative. 3. The proposition should contain no ambiguous words. 4. The proposition should be worded as briefly and simply as is consistent with the foregoing rules. EXERCISES IN SELECTING AND PHRASING THE PROPOSITION 1. Write out ...
Page
... affirmative nor the negative should undertake the burden of proving more than is necessary. In the discussion of the proposition “Resolved, that Prohibition is preferable to High License,” it is not necessary for the affirmative to ...
... affirmative nor the negative should undertake the burden of proving more than is necessary. In the discussion of the proposition “Resolved, that Prohibition is preferable to High License,” it is not necessary for the affirmative to ...
Contents
EVIDENCE | |
CONSTRUCTING THE BRIEF | |
CONSTRUCTING THE ARGUMENT | |
REBUTTAL | |
DELIVERING THE ARGUMENT | |
THE THEORY OF ARGUMENTATION AND DEBATE | |
ARGUMENT FROM CAUSAL RELATION | |
ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY | |
REFUTATION | |
APPENDIX B The LincolnDouglas Debate at Alton | |
Memorandum of Agreement for High School Debating | |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
adopted affirmative alleged cause analysis answer apply argument from analogy argument from cause argument from effect attention audience authority brief cards conclusion Congress Constitution construction Contents Declaration deductive definite delivery Democratic discussion Dred Scott decision enthymeme example exist fact fallacy fathers who framed favor Federal Government Federal Territories Harper’s Ferry hearer Henry Clay Illinois imperfect induction important income tax inductive reasoning institution of slavery interest introduction Judge Douglas Lecompton Constitution Lincoln Lincoln-Douglas Debate logical main issues major premise major term material matter means method middle term mind minor term natural monopoly Nebraska negro opinion opponent party persons point at issue political practice present principle prohibition proof proposition prove question rebuttal refutation regard Republican rules slave slavery sources of evidence speaker specific instances speech statement student syllogism tariff thing truth ultimate extinction Union United validity vote Whig words wrong