Uploaded on

Powerpoint for Chapter Three of Critical Thinking Through Debate.

Powerpoint for Chapter Three of Critical Thinking Through Debate.

More in: Sports , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
245
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Critical Thinking Through Debate Chapter Three
  • 2. First, a review
    • In chapter one, the text discussed debate as a process – what did they mean by that?
    • What are the three means of persuasion according to Aristotle? Provide an example of each.
    • On the next page are a number of resolutions – identify them as fact, value or policy.
  • 3. Fact, value or policy?
    • The State of California should raise taxes in order to lower the deficit.
    • Extraterrestrials crashed in Roswell, New Mexico during the 1950s.
    • Movies made in America have more graphic violence and gratuitous sex than they did ten years ago.
    • The environment should be valued over energy production when evaluating new dam building.
  • 4. A little more review
    • What are three ways of defining terms in debate?
    • What are the stock issues identified by the text for policy debate?
  • 5. An update on stock issues
    • S. = Significance
    • H. = Harms
    • I. = Inherency
    • T. = Topicality
    • S. = Solvency
  • 6. Chapter Three The Resolution: The Focus of Debate
  • 7.
    • RESOLVED
  • 8. Resolutions – why have them?
    • Provides judge with a guideline of what they are voting for/against at the end of the debate.
    • Used to limit the debate and provide for predictability of what the other side will talk about.
  • 9. Presumption
    • Consider law – what is “presumed” before a legal criminal case begins?
    • In debate, we “presume” that the status quo is innocent (or good enough) until proven guilty (or so bad we have to risk a change).
  • 10. Burden of Proof
    • If the status quo gets presumption , then who has the burden of proof?
  • 11. Burden of Clash
    • AKA – Burden of “rejoinder”
    • “ Silence means consent.”
    • Must respond at the first chance (next speech).
  • 12. Standards of Proof
    • Rule to live/debate by:
    • In debate, there is no truth with a capital T. Probability is the best we can hope for.
    • Possible: Not impossible, but not at all likely to happen.
    • Plausible: Possible, but more likely NOT to happen then to happen.
    • Probable: Not certain, but more likely to happen then not to happen.
    • Certain: Definitely will happen.
  • 13. Standards of Proof for Policy Debate
    • Must measure the following:
      • RISK of the good or bad thing occurring – this is likelihood or probability .
      • MAGNITUDE of the good or bad thing – is it a HUGE positive or negative, or just a SMALL positive or negative?
      • DIFFICULTY OF CORRECTING A MISCALCULATION. CAN it be corrected? How difficult would it be to correct?