The document discusses different types of debates, including the Lincoln-Douglas debate, rebuttal debate, and Oregon-Oxford debate. It explains the typical structure and flow of an Oregon-Oxford debate, which involves three speakers from each side presenting arguments and rebuttals. The document also outlines important concepts in debating like issues, aspects to debate (necessity, beneficiality, practicability), speaker roles, and common fallacies to avoid in arguments.

1. DEBATE

2. DEBATE
• Formal type of
argumentation
• Intelligent exchange
of points between
the affirmative and
negative sides

3. TYPES OF DEBATE
There are four types of debates that are most
commonly used. These are as follows:
 Lincoln- Douglas- is a kind of debate where
there is only one speaker in the side of the
affirmative as well as in the side of the
affirmative side opens the debate then
followed by the negative speaker.

4. THE REBUTTAL DEBATE
-is a kind of debate where each team
from the affirmative and the
negative side is composed of about
two or three members. As the
debate starts, the affirmative
speaker opens the constructive
speech and the negative speaker
starts the rebuttal. Every speaker is
allowed to deliver a rebuttal
speech. The debate is closed with
the affirmative side delivering the
last rebuttal.

5. ONE REBUTTAL TYPE OF
DEBATE
 is considered as a modified form of
the Lincoln-Douglas type of debate.
However in this type of debate,
there are about two to three members
in both the affirmative and the
negative side. In this debate, all
of the speakers have a chance to
refute the argument of the opponent
with the exception of the first
affirmative speaker who is given the
opportunity to close the debate in
his or her rebuttal speech.

6. OREGON-OXFORD DEBATE
 traditional debate format used in elementary,
governors debate, house debate rules,
parliamentary debate rules, high school debate,
youtube debate, presidential debate, colleges
and all over the country.
There are 2 sides in this format : the Affirmative
and the Negative. The Affirmative proves the
validity of the issue or topic called the
Proposition while the Negative disproves it.
Each team has two speakers and one scribe. A
Debate Moderator enforces the rules to ensure
the debate’s smooth conduct.

7. FLOW OF OREGON OFXORD
DEBATE
THREE SPEAKERS FROM EACH SIDE
1st speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes
1st speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes
1st speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minutes
1st speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minutes
2nd speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes
2nd speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes
2nd speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minute
2nd speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minutes
3rd speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes
3rd speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes
3rd speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minutes
3rd speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minute
5-minute break
speaker negative side rebuttal 5 minutes
speaker affirmative side rebuttal 5 minutes

8. In debate
Proposition

9. Proposition
Topic or issue
that is
argued upon

10. In exploring
Do some
interview
Utilize the
library-it’s
Do some
ORGANIZED
research!
Take down
Refer to
the notes!
web
the first
source
s

11. Parts of an argument

13. REMEMBER!
You should arouse
the attention of
your audience.

14. How?
Make them see
that the topic is
important.

15. How?
Show them that
the topic is
timely.

16. How?
Preserve a
favorable
attitude.

17. REMEMBER!
Second aim of
intro is to
explain the
proposition.

18. How?
Define all
important
words. (1st A)

19. How?
Set the
parameters/
limit of the
debate
(1st A)

20. How?
The whole idea
must be
clearly
explained.

21. How?
Present a short
but lively
history of the
topic.

22. REMEMBER!
Third aim of
intro is to
state the
ISSUES.

23. UNDERSTAND
ISSUES are the
questions that
when answered,
may destroy a
side.

24. UNDERSTAND
ISSUES are the
questions that
when answered,
may destroy a
side.

25. TEST FOR ISSUES
 Resolved that the K+12 be
implemented in the
Philippine Educational
System . (PROPOSITION)
• How would the proposition
affect the Philippine
Educational System? The
students?

26. TEST FOR ISSUES
 Resolved that the K+12 be
implemented in the
Philippine Educational
System. (PROPOSITION)
• Is there really a
need to implement
the proposition?

27. Parts of an argument

28. OPPOSING SIDES

29. AFFIRMATIVE

30. negative

31. Aspects of the debatE(+)

32. Aspects of the debatE(-)

33. NECESSITY

34. beneficiality

35. practicability

36. PARTS of the debatE(+)

37. Constructive speech
 presentation of
each team
member’s
arguments and
evidence for each
aspect of the case

38. Interpellation
 The opportunity for
the opposing
debater to ask
questions
regarding the
speech of the

39. Rebuttal
 The summary and
defense of each
team’s arguments
and evidence, to be
delivered by the
team captain

40. Speaker roles
 1A speaker-
NECESSITY
 1N speaker-NON
NECESSITY

41. Speaker roles
 2A speaker-
BENEFICIALITY
 2N speaker-NON
BENEFICIALITY

42. Speaker roles
 3A speaker-
PRACTICABILITY
 3N speaker-NON
PRACTICABILITY

43. FALLACIES IN DEBATE
Fallacy refers to an incorrect
argument which results in invalid or
unsound statements.
There are different kinds of
fallacies but below are the
commonly encountered fallacies in
any argumentation.

44. FALLACIES IN DEBATE
AD HOMINEM- is the fallacy committed
when one party attacks the character of the
other party for the purpose of making the
argument of that other party weak.
EXAMPLE:
I cannot accept the argument of Capt. Juan
Dela Cruz to implement zero alcohol policy on
board since he himself is an alcoholic.

45. POST HOC
 Is the fallacy committed when one party
considers the fact or situation that occurred
before as the cause of the occurence of
another situation without significant basis.
EXAMPLE: I believe that this technical
problem occured due to our newly-embarked
master. I am certain, for this
problem only occured two days after his
embarkmention. He is probably a bad luck.

46. AD POPULUM
 is the fallacy committed when one
party attempts to win an argument by
citing that most or a lot of people
believe in a certain position, as in
bandwagon fallacy.
EXAMPLE:
Everybody is drinking on board. I
should join them.

47. AD MISERICORDIAM
• is the fallacy committed when one
party uses an argument that appeals
to pity or related emotion in order
to convince and thus influence the
other party to give into will of the
former.

48. AD MISERICORDIAM
EXAMPLE:
I believe we should give him a
chance. I know the problem
occurred out of negligence. Yet we
need to consider his goodness. He
has been with us for several months
and he has been so good to us. He
has been helpful to us somehow.
What will happen to him if we will
recommend him for repatriation?
Anyway, nobody was hurt in that
incident.

49. AD BACULUM
• is the fallacy committed when one
party uses threat to invoke fear in
the other party and thus persuade
the other party to accept the will of
the former. However, the
threatening argument used is not
directly related to the main issue at
hand.

50. AD BACULUM
• I know I violated our code of
ethics. Yet you need to give me a
chance. Otherwise, I will inform
the company about your
anomalous activities here
onboard.