DEBATE TECHNIQUES FOR THE CLASSROOM: Why does my argument in a debate matter?

DEBATE TECHNIQUES FOR THE CLASSROOM: Preparing arguments 

Debate with confidence, persuade with strength!

Learning Objectives

1. Develop strategies for persuasive and successful debates: Understanding persuasive communication and build trust. For example, by understanding how to structure an argument with a clear statement, explanation, and illustration, you can make your point more powerful.
2. Increase understanding of non-verbal communication: Non-verbal cues can be just as important as what is said during a debate. By learning how to use body language, voice intonation and other non-verbal cues effectively, you can reinforce your message and better tailor it to your opponent's reactions. For example, using body language and vocal variation can strengthen the message and make it more convincing.
3. Managing conflict and giving and receiving constructive feedback: Debates can sometimes lead to conflict or resistance. The ability to manage conflict and give and receive feedback in a constructive manner can help conversations run more smoothly and build relationships, even in challenging situations. The ability to listen well and respond to counterarguments is crucial for effective debate.
4. Argumentation techniques: Proposition and Opposition: Learning how to effectively defend a position (proposition) and how to attack it (opposition) is essential in any debate. In proposition, you focus on presenting your position clearly and convincingly, supported by facts and logic. In opposition, you learn to identify and criticise weaknesses in the opponent's argument, while simultaneously presenting your own counterarguments.
5. Rhetorical techniques: 

• Reframing: Highlighting a topic from a different perspective to make your opponent's argument seem less powerful or your own argument seem stronger
• Generalising: Broad statements to make your point. This can be powerful, but should be used carefully to avoid exaggeration.
• Specifying: The opposite of generalising, where you zoom in on specific details to support your argument and anchor it in concrete examples.
• Omissions: Strategically not mentioning certain information to strengthen your argument or shift the focus.
• Distortions: Here you slightly adjust the representation of facts to support your argument, without distorting the truth.

AREI argumentation technique

1. Claim (Afirmación): Each argument supports a reason — the central idea we are trying to prove.
2. Reasoning (Razonamiento): The logical support for the claim; reached by asking WHY my claim is correct.
3. Evidence (Evidencia):Verifiable data — facts, testimony, authoritative sources or scientific studies — that demonstrate the reasoning and give it weight.
4.  

Example:

Claim: You are a very good footballer.

Reasoning 1: Your experience at top clubs has helped you improve your skills.

Evidence 1: You have played for Barcelona, Manchester United, Bayern Munich — teams that house some of the most skilful players in the world.

Impact 1: This benefits the team by providing a valuable top-level player.

Reasoning 2: Your performances and scoring record show how good you are.

Evidence 2: You were the competition’s top scorer and have won awards.

Impact 2: This benefits you (higher market value, more income), benefits the team (more revenue) — everyone gains.

Conclusion: Therefore, you are a very good footballer for the reasons explained above; this shows my premise is correct.

Impact (Impacto): Corresponds to the reasoning that answers the question: Why does my argument matter?

Toulmin Argument Model

The Toulmin Model is a format for preparing an argument.

1. Claim: The conclusion of the argument or the statement the speaker wishes the audience to believe.
2. Grounds: The foundation or basis for the claim, the support.
3. Warrant: The reasoning that authorises the inferential leap from the grounds to the claim.
4. Backing: The support for the warrant.
5. Modality: The degree of certainty with which the advocate makes the claim.
6. Rebuttal: Exceptions that might be offered to the claim.

Example of the Toulmin Model:

Claim: Atlético de Madrid will win La Liga this year.

QUESTION: What are you basing that claim on?

Grounds: They have the best defense in the league.

QUESTION: Why does the fact that they have the best defense in the league lead you to believe that the team with the best defense will win?

Warrant: The team with the best defense usually wins.

QUESTION: How can you make this claim?

Backing: The team with the best defense has won each of the last five years.

QUESTION: How are you sure that Atlético de Madrid will win La Liga?

Modality: The probability that FC Barcelona will win la Liga is 80 percent.

QUESTION: If you are so confident that Atlético de Madrid will win La Liga then why don’t you mortgage your house and place a huge bet?

Rebuttal: Anything could happen. Atlético de Madrid defense might have a lot of injuries.