DEBATE IN ENGLISH

prepared by
Ni Made Verayanti Utami, S.S., M.Hum.
DEFINITION OF DEBATE
 Debate is an activity in which the participants are
maintaining their team arguments by providing strong and
relevant evidences.
THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE
 To win your team arguments
 To convince the adjudicators that your team arguments are
valid, strong, and true.
THE PARTICIPANTS
 The participants in debate called DEBATERS
 There are 2 teams in a debate, they are:
1. Affirmative/Government team  This team agree with
the motion (topic)
2. Opposition team  This team disagree with the motion
(topic)
 There are three debaters in a team. They are the first speaker,
second speaker, and the third speaker. Reply speaker (deliver
the reply speech/overview debate) can be the first or the
second speaker.
JUDGING
 The judge in a debate called ADJUDICATOR
 There is a CHAIRPERSON who lead the debate
 There is a TIMEKEEPER who will count the timing. The
standard debating time is 7 minutes per debater. (except for
the reply speaker. That is only 5 minutes)
THE TOPIC
 The topic in debate called MOTION
 There are two kinds of motions, they are:
1. THW (This House Would…..)  a proposal debate (the
arguments suppose to be provided with solutions and steps
to solve the problems).
2. THBT (This House Believe That….)  a philosophical
debate (debating the motion whether it is true or false,
good or bad, significant or insignificant without providing
any solutions or steps in problem solving).
DEFINING THE MOTION
 The team who define the motion is affirmative/government team.
 The purpose of defining the motion is to make it clearer, more focus
and more specific.
 The opposition team will agree or disagree the definition. But they
have to provide the other true definition. This action called
CHALLENGE DEFINITION. However, this team should be careful
because the CHALLENGE DEFINITION can be done if the
affirmative team’s definition are:
1. TRUISTIC : a true definition and it can’t be debated.
2. TAUTOLOGICAL’CIRCULAR : circling definition which is no
point.
3. SQUIRELLING : the definition isn’t related to the topic.
4. TIME AND PLACE SETTING : the setting background of the
definition is not valid, such as taking an out of date event as a
definition.
TIPS TO DEFINE A MOTION
 Pay attention to the key words of the motion
 The definition should answering the question “WHY” so that you
have to put THEME LINE (main idea in a main reason)
 It should be clear, logical/make sense to the motion, and
debatable.
Example:
Motion: THW ban alcoholic drinks  ban and alcoholic drinks are
the keywords
Ban  how will you prohibit it? Why do we need to prohibit it?
Alcoholic drinks  What kind of alcoholic drinks? How many
percent alcohol contained in the drinks will be prohibited?
ARGUMENT
 There are some important points in an argument:
1. Assertion : statement of the argument that is going to be
delivered.
2. Reasoning : reasons that support the argument.
3. Evidences : proofs and facts that support the argument and
the reasoning.
4. Link back : link the argument to the theme line that has
been mentioned. (related to the theme line)
REBUTTLE
 Rebuttle is a refutation of the opposite team.You have to
REBUT the main argument of the opposite team.
 Rebuttle is usually based on:
1. Error facts
2. Irrelevant proof
3. Illogical
JOB DESCRIPTION OF THE
AFFIRMATIVE/GOVERNMENT TEAM
 First Speaker:
1. Deliver the motion
2. Deliver the background  how the motion is happened? Tips:
Relate the actual news with the motion
3. Define the motion
4. Mention the room of debate ( what is going to be debated)
5. Mention the stance of the team (agree or disagree with the
theme line) positive team is always agree.
6. Mention the theme line
7. Mention the team split (team work task division)
8. Deliver the main argument
9. Conclude and relate to the topic
 Second speaker:
1. Rebut the main argument of the first speaker from
opposition team
2. Clarifying the case of the affirmative team
3. Deliver the main argument of the second speaker
4. Relate the main argument to the topic
5. Conclude and retell the theme line of the affirmative team
 Third speaker:
1. Rebut the main argument of the second speaker from opposition
team
2. Clarify the case of the affirmative team
3. Review the rebuttle delivered by the first and the second
speaker of the affirmative team and keep refusing the opposition
team’s argument
4. Conclude and relate to the topic
REMEMBER:
1. Third speaker cannot deliver argument, they only review the
argument from the first and second speaker of their team.
2. Main task of the third speaker is to ATTACK/REBUTTLE and
give more examples.
JOB DESCRIPTION OF THE OPPOSITION
TEAM
 First speaker:
1. Respond the definition delivered by the first speaker of
affirmative team (accept or challenge the definition)
2. Rebut the argument delivered by the first speaker of
affirmative team
3. Mention the theme line of the opposition team
4. Mention the theme split (team work task division)
5. Deliver the main argument
6. Conclude and relate to the topic
 Second speaker:
1. Rebut the main argument of the second speaker from
affirmative team
2. Rebuild the opposition theme line (support with
evidences/examples)
3. Deliver the main argument
4. Relate the argument to the theme line/topic
5. Conclude and retell the theme line of the opposition team
 Third speaker:
1. Rebut the argument of the affirmative team
2. Retell the theme line of the opposition team/ review the
arguments delivered by the first and the second speaker
3. Emphasize the rebuttle mentioned by the first and the second
speaker and keep refuse the affirmative team’s argument
4. Give more relevant examples
5. Conclude and relate to the topic
REMEMBER:
1. Third speaker cannot deliver argument, they only review the
argument from the first and second speaker of their team.
2. Main task of the third speaker is to ATTACK/REBUTTLE and
give more examples.
JOB DESCRIPTION OF REPLY SPEAKER
 Overview the debate by telling:
1. The clash of the debate  the different arguments
2. Deliver their team arguments
3. Deliver the opposite team arguments
4. Deliver the strong points of their team arguments and the
weakness of the opposite team arguments
5. Emphasize their team arguments are better and deserve to be
winner because of the strong points of the arguments
mentioned. So, don’t forget to relate those arguments to the
topic.
 Reply speech is not a rebuttle. So, you cannot do rebuttle.
 The reply speaker must be the first or the second speaker of each
team.
ASSESSMENT
 There are three aspect that is going to be assess in an English
Debating:
1. Manner (40%)  Delivery (public-speaking skills, the
effectiveness of the arguments process delivering), Vocal Style
(voice volume), Language use, cue card use, eye contact,
gesture, stance (body position), humour, appearance, personal
attack on opponents.
2. Method (20%)  Structure and organization, Overtime or
undertime, Ability in responding the opposite team arguments
3. Matter (40%)  the content of the speech, relevant or not,
logical or not.
EXAMPLE
 THE EXAMPLE OF SIMPLE DEBATE

First speaker (Affirmative)

• Thank you Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the motion “smoking should be banned”.
• We, on affirmative team, strongly support this motion. We have three point, those are health, hospital costs and pollution.
• Our first point is health.
• Cigarettes fill your lungs with poisonous chemical, causing cancer and lung disease.
• According to the American Cancer Society, every cigarette you smoke shortens your life by approximately 7 (seven) minutes.
• Furthermore, this has directly affected my life. My acquaintance died of lung cancer two years ago. It was a long illness, and it caused their family stress and sadness.
• Our second point is hospital cost.
• Smokers cost the country a lot of money.
• This is because smokers get cancer and other diseases more than nonsmokers. Smokers miss more work and spend more time in hospital.
• Also, according to the Ministry of Health, the average smoker requires over $200,000 in hospital cost over the course of their lives. The total bill for the country is $50,000,000 a year.
• Our third point is pollution.
• Cigarettes make the air dirty.
• This is because when people smoke, they blow poisonous gasses into the air.
• There is a big problem on train platforms, where many people ignore the no smoking signs and blow smoke in your face. We should ban cigarettes to get rid of this problem.
• We have talked about health, hospital cost and pollution. We have shown clearly that cigarettes should be banned. We beg to propose.

Second Speaker (Negative)

• Thanks you Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, “all people should be vegetarians”. We, on the negative team, strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refuse the affirmative side, then, I will give
our points.
• Their first point was health. They said that it was not healthy to meat since it is high in fat and difficult to digest. We have to responses. First, it is not true that meat is difficult to digest. Our bodies are made to digest both
meat and vegetables. Second, it is not always true that meat is higher in fat than vegetables. Some fruits and vegetables, such as bananas and avocado, have a lot of fat. On the other hand, some kinds of meat, such as turkey, have
very little fat.
• Their second point was animal rights. They said that animals have a right not to suffer. We have to responses. First, it is not true that animals have rights. Right come from our country’s Constitution and our Constitution says
nothing about animal’s rights. Second, animal’s right are not as important as human rights, and if we stop fishing or raising animals, millions of people in the food industry will lose their jobs.
• Their third reason was the environment. They said that fishing and rising animals harm nature. We have to responses. First, this is not necessarily true. It is possible to raise animals and catch fish without harming the
environment. Second, it is not true that animal farming hurts the environment, since animals produce the carbon dioxide that plants require. We must keep the balance of nature.
• I have refuted the affirmative’s points. Now, I will give our points. We have three points those are health, the economy and taste.
• Our first point is health. We must eat meat and fish in order to stay healthy. Meat has a lot of protein, and fish both protein and iodine. It is difficult to get these nutrients from vegetables.
• Our second point is the economy. Millions of men and women work in agriculture, fishing, and the food industry. If we stop eating meat, they will lose their jobs and will be unemployment. This will cause hardship.
• Our third point is taste. Meat taste good, and many countries use meat in their national dishes. Can you imagine Thai food without shrimp, Japanese food without sushi, American food without hamburgers or German food
without Wiener schnitzel? Eating meat is enjoyable and an important part of our culture.
• We have talked about health, the economy, and taste and have shown that we should all not be vegetarian. For these reasons, we beg to oppose.

Rebuttal Speeches

• Thanks you Ladies and Gentlemen. We have been debating the resolution, “cats are better pets then dogs”. We on the negative team have clearly shown that this is not true.
• Let’s look again at the important points of this debate.
• First, the affirmative team talked about cost.
• They lose this point however, because it is not true that dog costs more than a cat. As we said before, it is easy to get dog for free at an animal shelter.
• The affirmative also talked about noise. They said that cats are quitter than dogs.
• They lose this point however, since my partner clearly explained that it is possible to teach a dog to be quite.
• On our side, we had two main points, protection and help.
• Our first point is protection.
• We explained that a dog can protect you from thieves.
• They responded by saying that house alarms are better than dogs. We win this point however, since the affirmative team never explained why an expensive house alarm is better than a loving dog.
• Our second point is help.
• We explained that dogs are more useful than cats.
• The affirmative team responded that cats catch mice, but this is not important. My partner explained that you can always buy mousetraps if you have problems with mice.
• Therefore, we win this point, since the affirmative team has never responded to this. The affirmative team never showed that cats have any significant use.
• Overall, we win our key points, and have refuted the affirmative team. Therefore, we win this debate, and ask you to choose dogs instead of cats. Thanks you.
 •Thank you Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the motion “smoking should
be banned”.
•We, on affirmative team, strongly support this motion. We have three point, those are
health, hospital costs and pollution.
• Our first point is health.
• Cigarettes fill your lungs with poisonous chemical, causing cancer and lung disease.
• According to the American Cancer Society, every cigarette you smoke shortens your
life by approximately 7 (seven) minutes.
• Furthermore, this has directly affected my life. My acquaintance died of lung cancer
two years ago. It was a long illness, and it caused their family stress and sadness.
• Our second point is hospital cost.
• Smokers cost the country a lot of money.
•This is because smokers get cancer and other diseases more than nonsmokers. Smokers
miss more work and spend more time in hospital.
• Also, according to the Ministry of Health, the average smoker requires over $200,000
in hospital cost over the course of their lives. The total bill for the country is
$50,000,000 a year.
• Our third point is pollution.
• Cigarettes make the air dirty.
•This is because when people smoke, they blow poisonous gasses into the air.
•There is a big problem on train platforms, where many people ignore the no smoking
signs and blow smoke in your face. We should ban cigarettes to get rid of this problem.
•We have talked about health, hospital cost and pollution. We have shown clearly that
cigarettes should be banned. We beg to propose.
 Second Speaker (Negative)
• Thanks you Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, “all people should be
vegetarians”. We, on the negative team, strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refuse the affirmative
side, then, I will give our points.
• Their first point was health. They said that it was not healthy to meat since it is high in fat and difficult to
digest. We have to responses. First, it is not true that meat is difficult to digest. Our bodies are made to
digest both meat and vegetables. Second, it is not always true that meat is higher in fat than vegetables.
Some fruits and vegetables, such as bananas and avocado, have a lot of fat. On the other hand, some kinds
of meat, such as turkey, have very little fat.
• Their second point was animal rights. They said that animals have a right not to suffer. We have to
responses. First, it is not true that animals have rights. Right come from our country’s Constitution and
our Constitution says nothing about animal’s rights. Second, animal’s right are not as important as human
rights, and if we stop fishing or raising animals, millions of people in the food industry will lose their jobs.
• Their third reason was the environment. They said that fishing and rising animals harm nature. We have to
responses. First, this is not necessarily true. It is possible to raise animals and catch fish without harming
the environment. Second, it is not true that animal farming hurts the environment, since animals produce
the carbon dioxide that plants require. We must keep the balance of nature.
• I have refuted the affirmative’s points. Now, I will give our points. We have three points those are health,
the economy and taste.
• Our first point is health. We must eat meat and fish in order to stay healthy. Meat has a lot of protein, and
fish both protein and iodine. It is difficult to get these nutrients from vegetables.
• Our second point is the economy. Millions of men and women work in agriculture, fishing, and the food
industry. If we stop eating meat, they will lose their jobs and will be unemployment. This will cause
hardship.
• Our third point is taste. Meat taste good, and many countries use meat in their national dishes. Can you
imagine Thai food without shrimp, Japanese food without sushi, American food without hamburgers or
German food without Wiener schnitzel? Eating meat is enjoyable and an important part of our culture.
• We have talked about health, the economy, and taste and have shown that we should all not be vegetarian.
For these reasons, we beg to oppose.
 Rebuttal Speeches

• Thanks you Ladies and Gentlemen. We have been debating the resolution, “cats are
better pets then dogs”. We on the negative team have clearly shown that this is not true.
• Let’s look again at the important points of this debate.
• First, the affirmative team talked about cost.
• They lose this point however, because it is not true that dog costs more than a cat. As
we said before, it is easy to get dog for free at an animal shelter.
• The affirmative also talked about noise. They said that cats are quitter than dogs.
• They lose this point however, since my partner clearly explained that it is possible to
teach a dog to be quite.
• On our side, we had two main points, protection and help.
• Our first point is protection.
•We explained that a dog can protect you from thieves.
• They responded by saying that house alarms are better than dogs. We win this point
however, since the affirmative team never explained why an expensive house alarm is
better than a loving dog.
• Our second point is help.
•We explained that dogs are more useful than cats.
• The affirmative team responded that cats catch mice, but this is not important. My
partner explained that you can always buy mousetraps if you have problems with mice.
• Therefore, we win this point, since the affirmative team has never responded to this.
The affirmative team never showed that cats have any significant use.
• Overall, we win our key points, and have refuted the affirmative team. Therefore, we
win this debate, and ask you to choose dogs instead of cats. Thanks you.