ARC - Foundation of Flawed Arguments 1/9/23
A - Alternate Cause: There is another reason for the conclusion to be true, not given by the author
R - Reversed: The argument is true, but the conclusion is actually the other way around; one thing causes another, but not in
the way the author suggested.
C - Coincidental: The conclusion assumes the two points are related, but perhaps they simply occurred at the same time and
are not connected.
Common Flaws
- Overlooked possibilities
I. Failure to consider alternative explanations
II. A conclusion of causation based on evidence of correlation
III. Confusing necessary and sufficient terms
A. If I’m in NY, you know I’m in the US. But, if I’m in the US, it doesn’t mean that I’m in NY.
Mismatched Concepts
I. Including alike/equivalent, mutually exclusive, and representation
Uncommon Flaws 1/10/23
I. Inappropriate Analogy - The author compares two unlike objects, terms, etc.
II. Equivocation - Using a key term in very different ways without first distinguishing the multiple definitions
III. Group VS Individual - Assuming that characteristics of an individual apply to a whole group, and vice-versa
IV. Circular reasoning - The author’s conclusion and premise are the same
A. “Restates its conclusion without providing sufficient evidence to support it”
B. Ex. “Pizza is my favorite food because I like pizza.”
V. Evidence refutes Rather than Supports the Conclusion - Draws a conclusion that is the opposite of what the evidence
implies - “You’re yawning, you must be hungry.”
Rarer Flaws
I. Appeal to Authority - An assumption that the “source” of an Argument is sufficiently credible – ie, both
knowledgeable and without bias or ulterior motive - and uses the opinion of an authority to persuade the reader
II. Can/Want VS Should - One term or concept represents another,
A. Study takes place over 3 days and conclusion for all times simple size or data
III. Lack of Evidence as Evidence Against - Using the absence of evidence as evidence. “Aliens haven’t made contact with
Earth so there must be Aliens in our solar system.”
IV. Scope Shifts - Assumes that conditions will remain constant over time, and that what is the cause in the past will be
the ase in the future. “You might get retained during your vacation next week, the forecast calls for rain today.”
V. Opinion/Belief VS Fact - Assuming a belief or opinion is based in fact
VI. Absolute Numbers VS Percentages - Errors can be made when an author improperly equates a percentage with a
definite quantity or vice versa
1/11/23
Debate: (n.) a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing
arguments are put forward.
- A debate is put together for the singular purpose of convincing the audience that one side’s viewpoints are truer than
the oppositions– to do this, the topics discussed should be debatable ones.
- Debatable means that is subject to disagreement or doubt
- If you’ve ever seen politicians or anyone else have a debate, then you already have a pretty good idea of
what debatable means. Something is debatable if there’s a reason to doubt it.
Source Veracity 1/23/23
- Veracity: noun
- conformity to facts; accuracy
- The accuracy of new information presented by an author within a given text, such as: news articles, textbooks, novels,
essays, etc.
Checking for Source Veracity
- Relevancy
- The importance of the information for your needs
- Currency
- The timeliness of the information
- Authority
- The source of the information
- Accuracy
- The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the informational context
- Purpose
- The reason the information exists
Debate Format
Affirmative Cross-Ex of Negative Cross-Ex of Affirmative Negative Affirmative
Constructive Aff by Constructive Negative by Rebuttal Rebuttal rejoinder
Negative Aff
6 min 3 min 7 min 3 min 4 min 6 min 3 min
Resolutions. Resolutions in L-D debate are usually stated as propositions of value. Although the propositions are
sometimes related to issues of policy, this is not always the case.
- Typical resolutions include: “The spirit of the law ought to take precedence over the letter of the law to
enhance justice, “Cooperation is superior to competition,” “Violent revolution is a just response to
oppression,” etc.
- Unlike in team debate, the debaters are expected to debate the resolution as a whole, not just as
a particular example.
Style
The original mission of this style is restoring persuasion and values to high school debate.
- Evidence is considered important but it is not the be all and end all that is in team policy debate.
- The emphasis is on speaking, clearly, logically and fluently.
- Large amounts of evidence will not yield a larger score.
Roles for debate
Speakers (3)
- One speaker for the opening stage, others can speak during other stages
- All group participants (4) will be expected to speak or confer with another
Recorders and notetakers (3-4)
- Individuals will record the opposition’s claims and counter-claims, to be reviewed and rebutted during
appropriate stages
- You want the fastest and most accurate note-takers here
Audience members (the remaining groups)
- Observers who, if time allows, will be able to further question the opposing sides during the ending stage
- Questions will strengthen the debate between sides
Criteria for Judging Lincoln-Douglas Debate
- Case Analysis: How well the debater develops a case in response to the resolution
- Organization: How well the debater organizes both the constructive and rebuttal speeches
- Value Crash: How clearly the debater emphasizes the value being supported by his side and how that
value is being measured (criterion)
- Evidence: Although value debating emphasizes logic and persuasion, evidence (eg quotes material,
contemporary or historical examples) should be used to supporting arguments
- Refutation: How thoroughly the debater refutes the opposing side and rebuilds his own case
- Courtesy: owe well the debater demonstrates respect for his opponent