英文辩论稿
■ 2. Presenting the motion and case
<Motion>
<Background information to the motion>
<Defining the motion/Casing> (Note: of course, this is mainly the task of the Prime Minister)
■ 3. Showing the (government / opposition) “stance” (or “team line”) for the round.
■ 4. Presenting your speech outline and team allocation.
■ 5. Refutation
<Transition to refutation part>
<Basics of refutation>
■ 6. Explaining points.
■ 7. Conclusion
<Summary> Spend approximately 30 seconds to summarize your speech.
<Indication the end of your speech>
Refutation
Refutation, which is to point out the weakness of the other side’s arguments, can be formulated into six basic types as below:
① Not relevant: “What you said is not relevant with what you are trying to prove. “
e.g. [GOV] Korean government should abolish death penalty because Canada abolished.
[OPP] It is not relevant because we are debating on Korea not on Canada.
② Not true: “You are a liar!”
e.g. [OPP] Korean government should not abolish death penalty because it deters crimes.
[GOV] It is not true because crime rate is increasing even though we have death penalty.
③ Not always true: “What you said is not always true.”
e.g. [OPP] Korean government should not abolish death penalty because of the victim families’ feeling.
[GOV] It is not always true because peoples’ feelings are case by case.
④ Not significant: “What you said is not important at all.”
e.g. [OPP] Korean government should have death penalty because life in prison costs much more money.
[GOV] It is not significant because those who are sentenced death penalty are put into jail long years before they are actually being executed.
⑤ Alternative plan: “There is a better plan to solve the problem”
e.g. [GOV] Korean government should abolish death penalty because of the possibility of misjudgments.
[OPP] There is a better solution to the problem, which is to have three trial systems and introduce new technology for investigation. ⑥
⑥ Flip: ”What you said is the opposite. It is actually our point”
e.g. [OPP] Korean government should not abolish death penalty because Koran government should protect its citizens as government role.
[GOV]
Outline: Reply Speech
The purpose of reply speech is quite different from the constructive speeches (e.g. PM speech). In reply speech, you assume the role of adjudicators; to be more precise, you are to explain the reason why your side has won the round.
You are expected to do:
a. explain the criteria to judge the round
b. summarize the round focusing on issues (or “crash point”).
c. Provide new illustrations to emphasize your arguments.
1. Greetings
2. Showing the outline.
3. Pointing out the failures of the other side.
4. Comparing arguments focusing on issues (crash points).
5. Conclusion.
-
善意的谎言辩论会反方事例(通用17篇)
善意的谎言辩论会反方事例篇1看过一篇电视报道,说的是一个老妈妈得了肾病,如果不换肾的话生命就会受到威胁,这时大儿子站了出来要求给妈妈捐肾,这可疼坏了老妈妈,老妈妈强烈反对,说要是这样自己还不如死了算了。没办法只能等待各种条件都比较匹配的肾,可是要等到这样...
-
善意的谎言辩论会反方典型事例(精选17篇)
善意的谎言辩论会反方典型事例篇1很久以前,有一个姑娘一生下来就瞎了眼.黑暗是她唯一的主题,世间的美丽和丑陋她无法得知.但她一直很快乐,因为母亲说她是村里最美丽的女子.而事实恰恰相反,她是村里最丑陋的女子.但她并不知道,她只相信母亲的话,所以,她快乐而骄...
-
优秀出色辩论赛策划书(通用15篇)
优秀出色辩论赛策划书篇1一、活动宗旨:为了让广大新生更好地适应大学生活,热爱。。。新校园,合理规划大学生涯,丰富我校的校园文化生活,体现大学生朝气蓬勃、积极向上的精神状态,提高我校新生辩论水平,培养学生的演讲能力以及团结协作能力,营造浓厚的校园学术氛围,同时...
-
法庭辩论技巧之围魏救赵(精选17篇)
法庭辩论技巧之围魏救赵篇1在(甲方)维护社会秩序主要靠法律还是(乙方)维护社会秩序主要靠道德的论辩比赛中,双方展开了这样一段论辩:乙方:我方认为社会秩序的维护主要靠道德,因为道德作为行为规范和价值评判的总和,支配着人们最基本的观念和立场,从而也支配了人类最...