Chapter 10 Chapter 9 The Process of the Debate

★Preparation for the debate The preparatory stage of the debate is an important stage in the debate process. It is the brewing and forming stage of the debater's arguments.This is the necessary preparatory work before the debate on the topic begins, and it is an important condition to ensure the quality and effect of the debate.In the preparation stage of the debate, there are two tasks that cannot be ignored: one is to form an argument, and the other is to establish a strategy for expressing the argument. ◎Important steps in forming an argument To form an argument for a debate, there are two tasks that cannot be ignored-analyzing the topic and collecting evidence.

1. Analyzing the debate Identifying the meaning of the topic is to grasp the meaning of the topic, figure out the connotation and extension of the concepts in the topic, and understand the background of the topic, because the background of the topic is the context of the concept used, which directly affects The connotation and extension of these concepts.For example, the topic of "trade protectionism can be suppressed" has various historical backgrounds and social backgrounds for the emergence, development, change and suppression of trade protectionism. Without understanding these backgrounds, it is impossible to grasp accurately and comprehensively. As for the meaning of the concept of "trade protectionism", it is impossible to determine whether to take a positive or negative attitude towards "can be suppressed".Therefore, understanding the background helps to better understand the meaning of the question. Only by clarifying the meaning of the question can we analyze its consensus points and controversial points, and then we can accurately find the points of disagreement.

2. Collect evidence Analyze a debate proposition, determine your opinion on the debate proposition, and form your own argument.Of course, when forming an argument, you have already mastered certain arguments, but in order to better demonstrate your own arguments, and be comfortable in the debate, you must also collect sufficient arguments, such as facts that can be used as arguments, theoretical materials or Metaphors, analogies, etc. The basic requirements for collecting evidence are: necessary, true, typical, and novel. Necessary: ​​Refers to the necessary evidence materials to prove one's own argument or refute the opponent's argument.It is an argument related to one's own point of view, that is, one's own point of view can be deduced from it, or the other side's point of view can be overturned.

Authentic: Truth is the life of arguments, and only authentic and reliable arguments can prove the correctness of one's own arguments.Whether it is a factual argument or a theoretical argument, it is necessary to identify the authenticity and verify that it is correct; the metaphor or analogy argument must be reliable, credible, and have a close logical relationship with one's own argument. Typical: Whether the argument can effectively prove the argument depends on whether it is typical.The so-called typical arguments are representative arguments that reflect the nature of things.Such an argument is very convincing.

Novel: Novel arguments can attract people, it is refreshing, and it can receive surprising effects.Therefore, the choice of novel arguments will increase the strength of the argument. ◎Determine the strategy for raising the topic The main work at this stage is to arrange offensive and defensive strategies.The so-called "attack" is to determine the methods and means to prove one's own arguments and refute the opponent's arguments.The so-called "defense" is to determine the methods and ways to resist criticism from the opposing party. To determine the offensive and defensive strategy, we must know ourselves and the enemy.On the one hand, we must fully evaluate our own side: whether the arguments are correct, whether the arguments are sufficient and reliable, whether the arguments are sufficient and rigorous, whether the defensive and offensive methods are appropriate, whether the overall cooperation is close, whether the materials related to the debate topic are prepared adequately, and whether the materials can be used To adapt to changing circumstances, etc., this is a "confidant".On the other hand, it is necessary to fully understand the other party, not only understand their debate views and strategies, but even the other party's personal conditions, such as psychological quality, knowledge literacy, hobbies, life experience, strengths and weaknesses, and the strengths and weaknesses of their overall cooperation, etc. , should be well understood, this is "knowing the enemy".Only by knowing yourself and the enemy can you use your own strengths to attack others' weaknesses.Only by determining the strategy in this way can it be possible to win a hundred battles.

★The beginning of the debate At the beginning of the debate, it is necessary to formally express opinions on the topic of the debate, establish their own arguments, and trigger the debate.In the debate, there are many ways for the debaters to make their arguments clear. Here are some common ways. 1. Introduction with examples and clear arguments Mr. Sun Yat-sen once told a true story in a speech: There was an overseas Chinese rich man with a property of more than ten million yuan in Java, South Asia. One day, he went out to visit friends, but he could not return because he did not bring a night pass and a night light. If it is seized by the Dutch police, it will be fined if it is light, and will be imprisoned if it is heavy.Out of desperation, he had to spend one yuan to ask a Japanese prostitute to take him home.Because the Dutch police will not ask the guests of Japanese prostitutes.

Sun Yat-sen said: "Although a Japanese prostitute is very poor, her motherland is strong, so her status is high, and her actions are free. Although this Chinese is very rich, his motherland is not strong, so he can't even walk freely." , the status is not as good as a prostitute in Japan. If the country perishes, we will be angry everywhere, not only ourselves, but also our children and grandchildren!" The purpose of Mr. Sun Yat-sen's speech is to awaken the consciousness of the people and call on everyone to rise up to overthrow the reactionary government and save the motherland.He took a true story as an example. In the story, there was a sharp contrast between the status of the wealthy overseas Chinese and the status of the Japanese prostitute, which made people feel depressed and unbearable. Immediately afterwards, Mr. Sun Yat-sen's words full of grief and indignation shook like lightning and thunder. Everyone's heartstrings have inspired everyone's strong patriotic spirit.

In the debate, use examples to elicit one's own arguments.This method of reasoning goes from reality to fiction, from concrete to abstract, from perceptual knowledge to rational knowledge. 2. Straight to the point, put out directly Beijing is heading towards the 2000 TV debate contest on the topic of "the general trend of rising prices can be restrained". I am worried about rising prices, and I want to know whether this rising momentum can be restrained, and our answer is absolutely affirmative." This method is straightforward and clear-cut, which not only facilitates the debaters to focus their arguments, but also helps the audience to distinguish the front.

In the debate, the debater goes straight to the point, puts out his arguments straight to the point, and then proceeds directly to the argument. 3. Pros and Cons Comrade Mao Zedong wrote in the section "'Very Bad' and 'Very Good'" in the "Report on the Investigation of the Peasant Movement in Hunan": "The peasants rebelled in the countryside and disturbed the dreams of the gentlemen. The news from the countryside spread to When they came from the city, the gentlemen in the city immediately clamored... From the society above the middle class to the rightists of the Kuomintang, all of them said in one word: "It's very bad."...In fact, as I said before, it is a broad The rise of the peasant masses to fulfill their historical mission is the democratic forces in the countryside rising up to overthrow the feudal forces in the countryside. The patriarchal feudal local tyrants and evil gentry and the lawless landlord class have been the foundation of autocratic politics for thousands of years. Imperialism, warlords, corrupt officials Overthrowing this feudal power was the real goal of the national revolution. What Mr. Sun Yat-sen had been working on for forty years in the national revolution, what he wanted to do but failed to do, the peasants did in a few months. This is forty It’s a wonderful feat that hasn’t been achieved in years or even thousands of years. It’s very good. There’s nothing ‘bad’ at all, nothing ‘very bad’ at all.”

This method of positive and negative comparisons to establish arguments can indeed launch a tit-for-tat offensive, and the audience can easily distinguish right from wrong and judge right from wrong in the sharp and sharp opposition. When debating, put forward both the pros and cons of your own theory and the other's theory at the same time, so that the right and wrong can be clearly distinguished. 4. Direct criticism When the patriotic general Feng Yuxiang was serving as the governor of Shaanxi, two foreigners went hunting in Zhongnan Mountain privately and killed two precious bison.General Feng called them to Xi'an and asked them: "Who did you greet when you went hunting in Zhongnan Mountain, and did you get a permit?" The general was very angry when he heard this, and said: "Zhongnan Mountain is under the jurisdiction of Shaanxi, and the bison belongs to China's territory. How can they be ownerless? You are breaking the law by hunting without permission. Don't you know the crime?" The two foreigners quibbled and said, "This time I am in Shaanxi, isn't the passport issued by your country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs allowing you to carry guns? It can be seen that our hunting has been approved by your country's government. How can we hunt without permission?" General Feng retorted: "If you are allowed to carry shotguns, are you allowed to hunt? If you are allowed to carry pistols, can you kill people at will in China?" One of the foreigners was still not convinced, and continued to argue: "I am in China. In the past 15 years, hunting has never been prohibited in the places I have visited; besides, there is no provision in Chinese law that prohibits foreigners from hunting in China.” General Feng sneered: “There is no provision that prohibits foreigners from hunting, yes. But Is there any provision that allows foreigners to hunt? You have not encountered any prohibition from the government for 15 years, that is because they are asleep. Now that I am a local official in Shaanxi, I have not fallen asleep. I have a guarantee entrusted by the state Responsibility for homeland security must be prohibited." At this point, the two foreigners had no choice but to admit their mistakes.

General Feng used strict logical reasoning to refute the two foreigners who hunted without permission. First, he refuted their argument of "shooting wild buffalo without owner", then refuted the reasoning of "permission to carry a shotgun in a passport means permission to hunt", and finally refuted the reasoning of "Chinese The law does not allow foreigners to hunt in the territory", which made the two foreigners have to admit their mistakes. When refuting, put forward the opponent's arguments first, and if you have a target, you can concentrate your firepower and attack the key points directly; ★Expanding stage of the debate The opening stage of the debate is to fully debate the topic of the debate.This stage is the key to determining the outcome of the debate. Therefore, the opposing parties (or multiple parties) must do their best to compare knowledge, wisdom, will, and eloquence. Brilliant, most aggressive stage. In the unfolding stage of the debate, the main side and the opposing side alternately defend and refute each other, but sometimes the boundary between defense and rebuttal is not clear, and the two are often mixed together. There is refutation in the defense, and defense in the refutation.This is to seek truth from facts, according to the actual needs of the development of the debate situation, defend when it is time to defend, and refute when it is time to argue, and do not separate them mechanically. The objects of defense and refutation are the arguments, arguments, and arguments of one's own side and the opposing side, and of course the key is the argument.Defense is to prove that one's own side is correct, so as to resist and deny the mistakes of the opposing side's refutation; rebuttal is to refute the mistakes of the opposing side, so as to explain and affirm the correctness of one's own side's arguments. At this stage, the debate on the topic of defense is fully launched, that is, the defense side revolves around their respective arguments, fully spreads out, defends and refutes. To defend is to defend one's own arguments.This has to be done in two ways: on the one hand, it is necessary to prove the correctness and credibility of one's own arguments with sufficient and conclusive evidence and logically rigorous arguments;Although maintaining one's own argument, enabling it to be established, and finally winning is the main purpose of defense, but in the process of defense, the authenticity and strength of the argument will directly affect whether the argument can be established, and whether the argumentation method is The rigor of logic will also affect whether the argument can be established. Therefore, in the defense process, it is necessary to fully prove the authenticity and reliability of the argument and the rigorousness and meticulousness of the argumentation method, and fully demonstrate the inevitability of using the argument to deduce the argument; Arguments and refutations of arguments.So, there are both arguments and rebuttals in the defense. Refutation is mainly to refute the argument of the opposing party, and to refute its argument can prove the correctness and credibility of one's own argument.If you can directly refute the argument of the opposing party and point out its falseness and absurdity, this is a straightforward way of rebuttal.In fact, refutation is also a very complicated process. Sometimes it is impossible or inconvenient to directly refute the arguments of the opposing party, so it is necessary to refute the arguments to prove that the arguments are false or wrong; Its arguments introduce arguments, so as to achieve the purpose of refuting the opposing party's arguments.In fact, while refuting the other party, one must constantly demonstrate one's own arguments, because one's own arguments are the basic standpoint for refuting the opposing party; in other words, one's own arguments are used to refute the mistakes of the opposing party.Therefore, in the refutation, there are both refutations and arguments. ★End of the debate The closing stages of the debate cannot be ignored either.Theoretically speaking, one side's argument can make the debate point be resolved, and the debate is terminated.What we mean by the resolution of the debate topic means that the content involved in the debate topic has been correctly understood, right and wrong, good and bad, and the truth has been grasped to a certain extent. But in reality, ending the debate is not so simple.We sum up and simplify all possible situations, and we can see that there are about three situations in which the debate is terminated: the first is that the proposition is resolved; the second is that the proposition is partially resolved; the third is that the proposition is not resolved. has been solved.The specific manifestations of these three situations are varied. 1. The debate is not resolved 1. Decide the outcome Winners are not right, and losers are not wrong.The winners and losers are determined by the pros and cons of the debate methods and techniques.Those with high skills win, those without skills lose.Therefore, this conclusion does not involve the resolution of the debate.This situation often happens in debate competitions. 2. Undecided The arguments of all parties in the debate are wrong and cannot solve the debate.Neither party could defeat the other, and in the end it was left alone, in fact, the topic of debate was shelved.The occurrence of such a situation is probably due to the fact that the content involved in the proposition has not been fully understood by people; or there is no possibility of solving this problem objectively; There is no sincerity to truly solve the debate, and a lack of responsibility for the pursuit of truth.This happens from time to time in academic debates and everyday debates. 3. Seek common ground while reserving differences The difference among them is just not a correct understanding, and it cannot really solve the topic of debate.It is a wrong understanding that all the defense parties have sought the same agreement, so they cannot resolve the topic of defense. The defense parties only compromise with each other and make concessions to each other.Although this situation is relatively rare in debates, it does happen. 4. Both lose This is a very special form of tiebreaker.Generally, the outcome is just nothing, and both parties (or parties) who are involved in the debate are defeated and damaged.This may be due to the fact that each side's arguments were wrong, or that the strategy and tactics of each defense's debate were wrong, or both.For example, in diplomatic negotiations and economic negotiations, this kind of situation happens from time to time.The negotiating parties (or multiple parties) are exploited and attacked due to some of the above-mentioned mistakes, resulting in a fight between the snipe and the clam, which hurts both sides and benefits the fisherman. Of course, this cannot solve the debate. With regard to the analysis of the various situations of the end of the debate topic, the most ideal way to end it is to solve the debate topic and discern the truth.But after all, it is affected by many subjective and objective factors.Only when it is possible to solve the proposition objectively, and the debater also has the conditions to solve the proposition subjectively, can this ideal ending method appear.But as far as the actual situation of the implementation of the debate behavior is concerned, the direct goal of the debaters is to win (because in most cases, the victory of the debate is linked to certain material and spiritual interests), and the gain Victory does not mean that it represents the correct understanding and the truth, so there are various situations in the above analysis.However, from a social point of view and from the purpose of debate, our debates are, after all, required to solve the debate and seek the truth.Therefore, if we analyze the debates that partially solve the propositions, or do not solve the propositions, from the perspective of social development, the end of this kind of debate is only the end of a debate behavior. until this issue is fully resolved.Analyzing from the perspective of human development history, debate as one of the important ways of human cognition, its ultimate goal is to discover and develop the truth, not just which side wins.And whether a certain defense party wins or not in the debate, it only marks the end of a certain stage in the long journey of human beings to understand the truth through debate. A step forward on the road; if this victory does not represent the truth, it shows that some lessons for reference have been obtained on the road to mastering the truth. What needs to be added is that the demarcation of these four stages in the debate process is not very clear in various specific forms of debate, and sometimes some stages may be mixed together.For example, in academic debates, putting forward arguments and launching debates are often carried out together. We analyze the debate process in four stages, just for the sake of clarity. 2. Part of the debate is resolved 1. Undecided Although the opposing parties in the debate have obtained correct understandings within the scope of the proposition and on different sides, the collection of these correct viewpoints has not completely and completely resolved the proposition, but only partially resolved it. . 2. Decide the winner The winner's argument does not fully resolve the proposition, it only partially seeks correct understanding within the scope of the proposition. 3. Seek common ground while reserving differences The debate between the opposing sides was protracted and inconclusive, and in the end they could only seek common ground while reserving differences.This situation is not uncommon in academic debates, negotiations, and daily debates.If the part of seeking common ground is a correct understanding, of course it only partially solves the debate. Third, the debate is resolved 1. Undecided The two opposing parties (or multiple parties) of the proposition did not decide who wins and who loses in the end, but the proposition has been resolved.This is often the case that although the arguments of each defense stand on one side, as far as the content of the proposition is concerned, they are all correct on different sides of the matter.Through debate, the understanding of all parties can be gathered together, and the topic of debate can be solved from different aspects.This situation is not uncommon in academic debates, negotiations, debate competitions and daily debates.This is also sometimes the case in pleas or court arguments. 2. Decide the winner One side wins, the other loses.Negative side can be divided into passive and active.The passive side of the negative side is indeed defeated by the winning side; the active side of the negative side means that the negative side actively obeys the arguments of the winning side, abandons its own views, and admits defeat by itself. Generally speaking, there are two possibilities for deciding the outcome of the debate.One is that the topic of debate has been resolved, and the other is that the topic of debate has not been resolved. We will analyze the latter situation below.Let's talk about the former case first.When we say that the debate topic is resolved, it means that the winning side does represent a correct understanding, and the losing side does belong to a wrong understanding. This is the victory of right over wrong.Through the debate, the content contained in the topic of the debate was judged to be right and wrong, the field of vision was expanded, and the degree of understanding of the truth was improved.This kind of situation of deciding the winner and solving the debate will appear in all forms of debate.