College student debate skills

College student debate skills (4 articles) College student debate skills 1

Principles of debate

1. Treat the principles of debate correctly Winning or losing

2. Respect the personality of the opponent in the debate

3. Sophistry is not equal to nonsense

Debate skills

If you only consider debate It would be biased to regard it as a battle of words. The difficulty of debating is not only that one must have extensive knowledge, quick thinking, good voice conditions and a certain level of recitation, but also that debating and judging are inherently soft. , relies more on the subjective judgment of the judges. Therefore, debate skills are the means to achieve victory in the debate. How to express rich knowledge with sophisticated language and appropriate techniques?

1. Pay attention to the use of body language: There is no absolute right or wrong in the debate topic. It depends on whose language is more convincing. Appropriate and rich body language can increase your persuasiveness.

2. The use of classic expressions in the free debate stage: The free debate stage is the climax of the entire debate competition. Every debater wants to make his language short, concise and highly targeted, and must use classic expressions from time to time.

3. Pay attention to the key points and the content: After all, the debate is not a performance. It depends on whether your language is persuasive rather than how powerful you are.

4. Avoid flaws (1. Flaws in form, including timeouts, continuous speeches during free debates, etc.; 2. Flaws in viewpoints, avoid making them absolute. 3. Pay attention to polite issues: Debates are not quarrels , be sure to control your emotions and pay attention to your demeanor. 4. Pay attention to the rules. )

5. The content should be based on the topic. Establish a space to highlight your own advantages. Have your own routine and stick to the topic.

6. Attack and defense coping skills

(1) Seek novelty. Newness must be new in terms of perspective, and cannot be logically new, because seeking novelty must both impress the audience and make it easy for the audience to accept it. Logical newness is not easy for people to accept in a short period of time.

(2) Regarding the questions raised by the opponent, you can push each other and there is no need to answer with an absolute answer.

(3) Any point of view is useful to both parties, it depends on how you use it.

(4) You must be sure to grasp the other party's loopholes and cannot subjectively guess the other party's intentions.

(5) Give examples with knowledge. You should consider which examples to give and how to give them in an offensive way.

(6) Be fully prepared

Listen carefully to the opponent’s debater’s speech, seize its loopholes, don’t dwell on one question, and don’t completely attack the other party’s topic. , mainly to make the other party have nothing to say about their topic. One detail is to be polite and don't make a fuss. Remember to say hello to the audience, judges, and opposing debaters. He is very keen to find the loopholes in the opponent's arguments and attack them directly.

Methods of debate

1. The logic of debate must be paid attention to

In debate, the logic of debate plays an extremely important role, which makes the debate Appear rigorous and organized to make your point of view appear unbreakable.

When analyzing the other party’s point of view and your own point of view, you must analyze its logical relationship, real logical status and logical difficulties. Knowing the logical relationship between the two parties’ opinions will determine the key points of the other party’s point of view. When expressing your opinions, you must pay attention to the logical level. When debating, the level should be clear. What should be said on the first point, what should be said on the second point, and what should be said on the third point, clearly and clearly.

You should also be good at making generalizations during debates. Use concise and concise language to explain your own opinions, don't say it in a big way and miss the main point. Only in this way can you occupy a favorable position in the debate; similarly, you must be able to use concise and concise words to summarize the other party's opinions, otherwise They tend to drift with the crowd and even lose their way. Only those who are good at logical induction will grasp the key points of the other party in the debate, attack the other party in a targeted manner, and make the other party truly fall into a passive situation.

Reductio ad absurdum needs to be used in debates.

The so-called reductio ad absurdum is to push the opponent's point of view to the extreme along the logic of the other party, so that its absurdity is clearly displayed, thereby fundamentally denying its point of view. Using the reductio ad absurdum method will magnify the opponent's originally unclear or small logical errors to the point where they are known to everyone. In this way, surprising and winning results can often be achieved. Of course, when using the method of reductio ad absurdum, you must pay attention to moderation. If used improperly, it will give people the feeling of strong words.

2. Try to make the debate vivid and the language interesting

Make full use of vivid examples in life and use as little abstract and dogmatic reasoning as possible. As the saying goes, facts are better than facts. eloquent. Use humorous language more often and avoid boring vernacular.

Replace preaching with concrete, well-documented data, and avoid using inaccurate words such as maybe, probably, probably, should, and you think. In debates, accurate data often plays a very important role. Wherever possible, numbers should be used where possible, because as long as the numbers are well-documented, regardless of whether they are accurate or not, the other party is often unable to refute or deny it.

3. We must pay attention to the balance between offense and defense

Debate is like fighting, offense and defense are a pair of basic contradictory relationships. In a debate, defense is defense and rebuttal is offense.

Two extremes often appear in debates: one is only about defense, and the result is that the debate goes back and forth, and the battle is carried out on one's own side, which does not pose any threat to the other party's point of view, so that it is impossible to obtain Victory; the second is to only focus on offense and not dare to answer or debate directly the evidence and questions raised by the other party. You are mentally timid at first. In this way, you often lose your camp before you have broken through the other party's fortress. College student debate skills 2

College student debate attack skills 1: Preparation for attack.

This preparation should begin after the debate strategy plan is determined and the defense statement is finalized. Generally speaking, each debater should prepare questions to ask the other party based on what he or she has explained. Questions can be prepared according to the length of free debate time. If it is the first time on the stage, about 20 questions should be prepared. If this is the case, the four debaters should prepare about 80 questions, which is generally enough to make it possible to last until the end of the free debate. We have seen that in some games, some players have time but no questions to ask. This is caused by lack of preparation.

The questions you are going to ask should be prepared from three levels.

The first is a phenomenon-level issue, also known as a fact-level issue. This type of question can easily arouse the audience's excitement. If raised well, it will be easy to be outstanding and effective. However, it should be noted that you should not deviate from the topic of argument by trying to be novel, as this will have negative effects.

The second is a theoretical level issue, also known as an argument level issue. That is, extending one's own arguments and refuting the other party's arguments. This type of question should be asked sharply when asked directly, cleverly when asked indirectly, timely when asking rhetorical questions, and tactfully when pressing. The effect is to make it difficult for the other party to answer and unable to avoid it.

The third is the value level issue, also known as the social effect level issue. That is to extend the other party's arguments and positions, and extend its effect from the value level and social effect level to see whether it is persuasive and tenable. This type of question can, firstly, expand the battlefield for free debate and create passiveness for the other party. It is also an important aspect in winning the recognition of the audience and judges. Of course, if the position of the argument is unfavorable to one's side, one should use it with caution to avoid shooting oneself in the foot.

Among these three types of questions, fact-level questions can include historical events, actual facts, country facts, numerical facts, etc.; while theoretical-level questions can also be extended to include arguments in positions, etc. axiomatic, philosophical level.

With these three levels of problem preparation, you can form a three-dimensional formation, engage in a three-dimensional battle with free debate, and easily create a passive situation in which the opponent is trapped in a three-dimensional encirclement. We have seen that in competitions, many debate teams only prepare one-level questions (mostly phenomenon-level questions) and only spend time on interesting aspects. The result is that the impact is not strong, and the questions always flow. Disputes over superficial phenomena sometimes lead to facts leading to facts and sidetrack the topic, turning into ordinary language games and question-asking games. The depth of the debate is not easy to see, which is regrettable.

Attack Tip 2 for College Student Debate Contest: Organization of Attack

An effective attack in a free debate should reflect the orderliness of the attack, that is, the sequence of turns can be seen, and The basic thing is to have the initiative on the court and be in an active position to control the situation. In order to achieve this goal, there should be "soul players" on the court, also known as "main debaters" and "main debaters". Any debater can play this role, but generally it is played by three debaters, one debater, or two debaters. Sometimes, Si Bian also plays the role of this character very well. His task is to thoroughly know not only his own position, but also the opponent's position. It is stipulated that as soon as the speech is over, the opponent's main problems can be discovered, so as to launch an effective attack. The tasks of the soul team members are:

(1) Have a calm perspective on the entire free debate battle situation, and ensure effective attacks.

(2) Act as the commander on the field. Asking questions is not about asking too many questions, but asking questions carefully. His questions are not only an attack on the other party, but also reveal and strengthen his own argument.

(3) Undertake the task of actively transferring the battlefield. If you have been asking questions at one level for a long time, you will turn to another level to ask questions; if you are passive and frozen at one level, you will turn to another level to open up new attack points and battlefields.

(4) Be able to effectively turn danger into safety, turn danger into safety, and turn passivity into initiative when dealing with critical issues raised by the other party that endanger our bottom line.

(5) When one side mistakenly falls into the other side’s trap, stays far away from one’s side, and falls into a passive situation, one must be able to catch up later and launch another attack.

Of course, other team members must actively cooperate and actively respond to form the overall strength. This requires tacit understanding among the team members to form a "fluid overall consciousness."

The key to the organization of the attack is to form an overall orderly rheology. Instead of a hammer here and a stick here and there, pieces of chicken and dog. Piecemeal attacks are far from organized, and they may have a dazzling effect, but for group debates, it is impossible to take the initiative.

The attacking organization can have the following inspection indicators before taking the field:

First, is there an organizer, that is, whether there is a "soul player", and what is its organization and adaptability?

Second, does the entire team have a tacit understanding and sympathy with it?

Third, does the entire team have a completely consistent understanding of the position of the specific debate topic, and are there any major obstacles?

The fourth is to prepare several levels of problems. How difficult a situation can these problems be dealt with and how long can they be sustained?

The fifth is to deal with very difficult and demanding situations. Sharp question, to what extent has our side done our research and is there any good response strategy?

Sixth, the most dangerous situation that will arise in the free debate. What will it be like? What should our side do? How to deal with it?

Once you have thought through these six problems clearly and have solutions, then the attack organization will be organized and proactive.

Attack skills in college debate competition three: Attack questions

Attack skills mainly include the following types:

(1) Set up a dilemma. That is, setting up a dilemma question, no matter whether you answer this or the other, you will be passive. But you must stay on topic and don’t make excuses.

(2) Active extension. That is to extend a certain fact or sentence of the other party, causing one party to take the initiative and the other party to be passive.

(3) Attack the shield with a spear. That is to say, the contradiction between the opponent's argument and evidence, the contradiction between the statements of this debater and that debater, the contradiction in a certain debater's statement, the contradiction between the answer to this question and the answer to that question, or other contradictions, To embarrass him, to embarrass him.

(4) Reductio ad absurdum question. That is to say, the argument or argument or other issues are extended to reductio ad absurdum, trapping them in a passive position and unable to save themselves.

(5) Simple questions and deep meanings. That is to say, the question is very simple, but its meaning is profound and closely related to the topic of the debate. It's difficult to answer accurately, but it's embarrassing if you can't answer. It's easy to fall into passivity if your answer is inaccurate.

(6) Tearing and catching leaks. That is to say, tear apart a small gap in the opponent's body, expose its obvious loopholes and mistakes, and expose and question them to embarrass them.

(7) Familiar things are mentioned in new ways.

People often turn a blind eye to things that are familiar to them, or they are very familiar with them but only know the general outline but do not understand the details. Generally speaking, asking questions about this kind of thing can easily make the other party passive.

(8) Forced into a blind corner. That is, forcing the other party's questions into a blind corner and then asking questions to make it difficult for them to escape.

(9) Ask multiple questions. That is, asking a type of questions from several directions, aspects, and levels at the same time. However, it should be noted that such questions must be aimed at a core, that is, the main positions and viewpoints of the debate, so as to create an encirclement formation so that the other party has no ability to parry, let alone the ability to fight back.

(10) Ask questions from a flanking attack. That is, two or more people ask the same type or question at the same time, creating a flanking situation, causing the other party to focus on one thing and miss the other.

(11) The questions are similar and different. That is, facing the same problem, asking questions from different angles makes it difficult for the other party to justify themselves and is overwhelmed.

(12) Different questions but the same question. Seize the other party's different questions and different expressions and summarize them, and ask them in general terms, making them unable to grasp the depth and height of the questions and unable to answer them.

(13) Repeated questioning. If the other side dodges a question that the other side has to answer, you can press it repeatedly, but generally not more than three times, and you cannot ask unlimited questions. This will have the negative effect of leaving no questions to ask or boring the audience.

(14) Radiation questions. That is, when a question is raised, it will intimidate four debaters on the other side at the same time, like a cluster bomb. Such questions are usually asked at the philosophical or value level.

(15) Tautology. That is, the same question is asked in different language methods (or from different angles, or in different question words). Such questions are mostly about the main positions and viewpoints of the debate.

(16) Ask close questions and distant questions. That is, things that seem very close are put into perspective and questioned from a distant perspective. The other party often cannot answer when answering from far away, and it is difficult to pick up the answer when answering close by, thus falling into the dilemma of being elusive and unable to start.

(17) Questioning questions. That is to use the means of psychological control to directly hit the opponent's emotional level, making it excited, and triggering emotional linkage, thereby overwhelming the opponent's reason. However, it should be noted that you cannot engage in personal attacks or emotional confrontations, and you must not get into unreasonable entanglements or even arbitrary entanglements. Then painting a tiger will not turn into an anti-dog.

(18) Ask questions. That is to lay a trap for the other party to get into, or find ways to trap it. The higher skill is the chain set.

(19) Long draw and short hang. That is to say, he suddenly raises this question and then raises that question. He stays on the topic of the debate but moves here and there. He uses his quick thinking and quick wit to gain the initiative.

(20) Answer the question. There are two types, one is to ask questions when the other party finds problems (including problems discovered during the presentation stage) when answering questions, and the other is to ask rhetorical questions when you answer the other party's questions. College student debate skills 3

Principles of debate

Treat the outcome of the debate correctly

Respect the personality of the opponent in the debate

Sophistry does not mean Being messy

Skills in debating

Hit the point, and when necessary, use the method of "avoiding the truth and using the false".

Take advantage of contradictions, expand them, try your best to expand the other party's contradictions, widen the cracks in the other party's views, and force the other party into a dilemma. Make it too busy to take care of itself and unable to attack itself. "Use the spear of the son to attack the shield of the son", making him anxious, confused and speechless, and speechless.

To lure the snake out of its hole, you can adopt a roundabout method, starting with seemingly unimportant questions and inducing the other party to say or answer nonsense.

Li Daitao Zong, the so-called Li Daitao Zong is to use vague concepts to deal with the other party in a debate, hiding some of your own unclear or ambiguous views so that they are not directly attacked by the other party.

Methods of debate

Must pay attention to the logic of debate. In a debate, the logic of the debate plays an extremely important role. It makes the debate appear rigorous and organized, and makes one's point of view appear unbreakable.

Try to make the debate vivid and the language interesting. Only by incorporating vivid, vivid, and interesting language into the debate will the debate in the entire forum be full of vitality, and the forum's popularity will be strong.

Pay attention to the accumulation of knowledge when participating in debates

1. Read the other party’s articles and related materials carefully.

Analyze the content of the theme theoretically to avoid the vulgarity and impoverishment of the defense and make the defense rich in theory and knowledge. Absolutely avoid using vulgar examples and low-interest gimmicks in debates, or replacing theories with emotions and pretending to be inflammatory to win the sympathy or applause of the people.

2. Pay attention to the accumulation of daily comprehensive knowledge.

The topics debated on the forum are rich and colorful, and attention should be paid to the accumulation of knowledge in all aspects of daily life. If a person only has the enthusiasm for debate, but his knowledge base is very poor and there are few things to mobilize, he will fall into the dilemma of "a clever woman cannot make a meal without rice". No matter how high the enthusiasm is, he will not be able to achieve the desired results. . The so-called words cannot express the meaning, and the words cannot convey the meaning. Knowledge is like a pyramid. If you don't understand the broad knowledge background and only know a lot or rich knowledge of this professional knowledge, it is impossible to use it freely and respond fluently in debates on the forum. College student debate skills 4

Debate principles for college debates

Treat the outcome of the debate correctly

Respect the personality of the debate opponent

Sophistry is not the same as nonsense

Pay attention to the accumulation of knowledge when participating in debates

Debate skills in college debate competitions

(1) Leveraging strength

< p> There is a trick in martial arts novels called "borrowing force to fight", which means that a person with deep internal strength can use the opponent's attack power to counterattack the opponent. This method can also be applied to debates.

The reason why the positive side can use the negative side's examples to counterattack is because he has a series of theories that reinterpret words that are not expressed verbally as a strong backing.

(2) Substituting the other side's arguments

Eliminating the flawed parts of the other party's arguments and replacing them with viewpoints or materials that are favorable to us can often achieve the miraculous effect of "making a difference". We call this technique "transferring flowers and trees".

In debate theory, the technique of substituting what you have learned is a strong attack. It requires debaters to have the courage to accept moves and fight back, so it is also a difficult and highly confrontational technique. Very persuasive argumentation skills. It is true that actual on-the-spot debates are eloquent, the situation changes, and there are more "transfers", requiring debaters to accurately summarize or interpret the other party's views and our own position at the time.

(3) Go with the flow

On the surface, agree with the other party's point of view, follow the other party's logic to deduce, and in the derivation, according to our needs, set up some reasonable obstacles to make the other party The point of view cannot be established under the added conditions, or a conclusion that is completely opposite to the other party's point of view can be drawn.

(4) Drawing fire under the hood

Tricky selective questions are one of the common offensive moves used by many debaters. Usually, this kind of question is premeditated. It can put people in a "difficult" situation. No matter which choice the other party makes, it will be detrimental to you. A specific technique for dealing with this kind of questioning is to extract a preset option from the other party's selective questions for a powerful counter-examination, which fundamentally frustrates the other party's energy. This technique is to draw fire from the bottom of the cauldron.

Of course, the actual situation in the debate field is very complicated. If you want to change from passive to active in the debate, mastering some skills of resisting the guest is only one factor. On the other hand, resisting the guest also needs to rely on It's a very good improvisation, but this one is unstructured.

(5) Attack the key points

In debates, it often happens that the two sides are entangled in some trivial issues, examples or expressions and argue endlessly. As a result, it seems that the debate has failed. It’s very lively, and actually it’s thousands of miles off topic. This is a big no-no in debate. An important skill is to quickly identify the key issues in the opponent's argument after the opponent's first and second defense statements, so as to seize this issue and attack it to the end, so as to theoretically defeat the opponent completely. For example, the key point of the debate "Food and clothing is a necessary condition for discussing morality" is: Can we talk about morality without having food and clothing? Only by always grasping this key issue in the debate can we deal a fatal blow to the other party. In debates, people often say "avoid the truth and replace the truth with fiction", and it is necessary to use this technique occasionally.

For example, when the other party asks a question that we cannot answer, if we force ourselves to answer without thinking we know it, we will not only lose points, but may even make a joke. In this case, you must tactfully avoid the other party's problems and find the other party's weaknesses to attack. However, in more cases, what we need is to "avoid the weak and focus on the real", "avoid the weak and focus on the important", that is, be good at fighting tough battles on basic and key issues. If we immediately evade the other party's question, it will definitely leave a bad impression on the judges and the audience, thinking that we do not dare to face the other party's problem. In addition, if we fail to attack the basic arguments and concepts proposed by the other party, we will also lose a lot of points. Being good at grasping the opponent's vital points keenly and attacking fiercely to win is an important skill in debating.

(6) Exploiting contradictions

Since both sides of the debate are composed of four team members, conflicts often arise between the four team members during the debate. Even if they are the same team member, they will not be free to debate. , because the words are spoken quickly, conflicts may also occur. Once such a situation occurs, we should seize it immediately and try our best to expand the opponent's contradictions so that it will be overwhelmed and unable to attack us. For example, when debating with the Cambridge team, the Cambridge team’s third debate argued that law is not morality, while the second debate argued that law is basic morality. These two views are obviously contradictory to each other. We took the opportunity to widen the rift between the two debaters on the other side and force the other side into a dilemma. Another example is that the opponent first regarded "food and clothing" as the basic state of human existence in the first debate, and later, under our fierce offensive, he talked about the state of "hunger and cold". This is in conflict with the previous view, and we use " "The son's spear, the attack son's shield" makes the other party anxious, confused and speechless, and speechless.

Debate methods for college student debate competitions

1. The logic of debate must be paid attention to. In a debate, the logic of the debate plays an extremely important role. It makes the debate appear rigorous and organized, and makes one's point of view appear unbreakable.

2. Try to make the debate vivid and the language interesting. Only by incorporating vivid, vivid, and interesting language into the debate will the debate in the entire forum be full of vitality, and the forum's popularity will be strong. ;