How to win debates: a brief survey

Hey! Over the last little while I've been collecting various bits and pieces of advice for good debating on this site. While no advice has been consistent, here are 7 basic tips I've found most people agree on:

Use Research - easily the most emphasized point. Researching before you make your arguments can give you a serious edge against relatively unprepared opponents, especially if you're not very familiar with the topic.
Winning isn't everything - also a very common sentiment. You won't win every debate so learn to take a loss! Losses can be valuable teaching/learning tools. Learn to congratulate your opponents, not hate them.
Learn logic - logic matters! A basic knowledge of deduction and such will take you a long way towards winning debates.
Have good conduct - good debaters tend to be more civil and polite. People appreciate that sort of thing.
Avoid fallacies - basic logical fallacies are much easier for your opponent to tear down. Knowing the fallacies can also help you identify them if your opponent makes any.
Be confident - fake it till you make it, as they say. Indicating at all that you're not going to win is not a smart strategy.
Know your enemy - learn to anticipate your opponent's arguments before they even make them.

Remember there are many different opinions of how to be good! Know your style and above all, have fun doing it.

Posted by admin

< Return to resources index page

Comments

Sorry, you need to be logged in to leave a comment

Comment posted by ColeTrain
2015-05-19 14:47:08
Conduct is a big thing. If you run out of character space in the argument, thank your opponent it in the comments for sure.

Comment posted by lannan13
2015-05-27 09:31:31
Sources, you need valid sources. If you site things like wikipeadia all the time you're arguments will get nowhere. Site scholary sources like books, studies, and .edus and such.

Comment posted by Kasmic
2015-06-02 05:46:43
Structure seems to be an important aspect as well. Not that there is a perfect structure per se. Here is a decent generic structure.

Debate checklist:

1: Housekeeping

a) definitions
b) burden analysis
c) What the debate is/is not about

2: Case Structure

“You give the reason for that idea (Why is your idea the case? Prove it.)” (YYW)
“You articulate the impact (Why should I care that you have this idea?)” (YYW)

a) Harm: state what's wrong on a general level
b) Link: provide evidence and analysis linking the opposing case to that harm
c) Solvency: a link, provide a point on solvency, explaining how my plan solves for it.
d) Impact: give clear reasoning as to why biting that harm should be viewed as a winning point

Conclusion: summarize points