Debate on protecting the environment

The national environmental protection law is the best proof. The environmental protection law is constantly improving. People's awareness of environmental protection is unequal, and people's self-discipline ability is even unequal. It is impossible for everyone to be self-disciplined. Discipline can only play a general binding role and cannot be enforced. The environmental problem is a big problem related to the survival of people all over the world. It is impossible for everyone to have enough knowledge and awareness of environmental protection.

Nowadays, many colleges and universities have also set up environmental resources protection majors, which proves that this is a professional problem.

By the way, think for yourself. You should be in a favorable position. That's easy to say. The theme of the debate is: develop the economy first, then protect the environment; On the other hand, protect the environment first and then develop the economy.

Enough! ~

Debate in a narrow sense, that is, what you call debate, is a debate contest.

The fundamental purpose of the debate is for two reasons: to improve the ability of thinking and language manipulation. Although you should describe yourself as the embodiment of truth, the messenger of light, the model of morality and the spokesman of reason in the competition, you should understand the true meaning of debate in your heart, so that you can really benefit. )

The process of debate is divided into two stages: pre-competition preparation and competition.

Many people pay more attention to the game, but in my humble opinion, preparation before the game is more important. The team that wins the game is often the team that is well prepared before the game.

Let's talk about some experiences in these two stages.

The preparation stage is divided into three processes:

First, break the topic-that is, deeply understand the central idea of the debate and analyze the core issues that the debate responds to. The problem is directional. Once the solution is wrong, the direction is wrong, and even faster is the opposite direction.

For example, in a competition, I am a judge, and the positive argument is that professionals are more adaptable to society than generalists. Their argument is based on the fact that generalists do not exist at all. Therefore, it has been decided that once the argument is put forward, the affirmative will lose. Why? Because they have questions about the topic. Since the topic is put forward in this way, a hypothesis is given: generalists and professionals coexist. They don't understand the argument at all, so they blindly demonstrate, and it is useless to fully and rigorously demonstrate.

By the way, the debate here. Debate is an argument of one side. A good debate must be distinguishable, and both sides should have distinguishable space. There are obvious contradictions and conflicts between the two, and there is no distinction between academic and moral merits. Otherwise, it will be a bad debate. This determines that any good debate has no right or wrong. Any good debater knows this very well, so he will never dwell on a debate topic again and again. I hope that from the debate, those who seek truth simply don't understand the real purpose of the debate.

Second, the argument-that is, to prove the argument (our point of view) to establish sub-arguments to support our point of view. There should not be too few arguments, otherwise the foundation is unstable and it is difficult to support a tree; Not too much, or the front is too long to care about the beginning and the end. Generally, 3~4 is better, forming a tripartite confrontation.

As a sub-argument, first of all, it should be impeccable and tenable. The argument is to support the point of view, and the argument itself is full of loopholes. Instead of supporting opinions, it will become a burden and become the object of attack by the other side.

Secondly, the more directly the argument supports the viewpoint, the better. For example, if you argue that something is an egg, your argument is "it is round", which is too far from the point. Although it can be argued, it is too indirect. If your argument is "this thing is born by a hen", it is very direct.

Third, argumentation-that is, the process of proving opinions with sufficient arguments through strict reasoning. Argumentation should meet two conditions:

1, the argument is sufficient and powerful;

2. The logic of the demonstration process is strict;

Let's talk about the first point, "the argument is fully powerful." I don't know if you are a university or a middle school. If you have learned to write a thesis, you should know that arguments are divided into factual arguments and rational arguments. Factual arguments are objective facts, and rational arguments are recognized theoretical viewpoints. As far as the debate is concerned, it can include: axioms, good customs, famous sayings and aphorisms, laws and regulations, views on our government and so on. "Sufficient" means having a certain amount. Of course, the more the better, but you can't hang yourself from a tree. More important is "strength". What is strength? Directly-directly proved the point of view; Authority-including two meanings, one is the opinion of authoritative departments or people, and the other is the long-term recognition of the public;

The second point is that "the logic of the argumentation process is rigorous". It doesn't matter if you haven't studied logic. Because of the tight rhythm, fierce confrontation and low logic rigor in the debate, there is no time to carefully scrutinize whether your logic is rigorous. As long as you solve the problem, demonstrate and demonstrate in the above way, there will be no obvious logical problems. One of the most common problems for beginners is self-contradiction and hypothetical argument. In most cases, self-contradiction is due to the inconsistency of ideas among debaters, inadequate preparation or the appearance of "ghosts" who like to be unconventional, which leads to contradictions and inconsistencies among debaters. Hypothetical argument refers to "if …", "maybe …" and "if …" in the process of argument.

"Say' if', the whole of Paris can be put into a bottle." Your hypothesis proves nothing.

Adequate preparation is the key to winning the game. Of course, the process of repeated speculation is extremely painful. Sometimes when fighting with yourself, it is easy to feel split personality, and it is also a tedious job to find a lot of information. But as long as you are patient, you will certainly benefit and improve.

It is also my humble opinion to talk about the experience in the competition. I don't know if it will help.

First, the determination of the outcome. Generally, the jury judges the outcome from two aspects: debate and team (of course, I mean the judges who have more knowledge and experience in the debate). Argumentation: whether the viewpoint is clear, whether the argument is rigorous, whether the proof is powerful and whether the argument is sufficient. In a word, have you really proved the correctness of your point of view? Team: whether the debaters cooperate tacitly, whether the language is clear and fluent, and whether the manners are generous and decent.

Second, the debater. Debate is a battle with language as a weapon. But this does not mean that players can fight without fear. That was a quarrel, not an argument. A good debater, whether winning or losing, will be respected by everyone. This is the debater's personality charm, not his quarrelling ability.

As a debater, there are some taboos that must be observed:

1- Do not insult or abuse the other party;

2- Don't talk about each other's privacy, school debates are often well known and easy to happen;

3- Never leave the debate seat;

4- Don't use insulting gestures, such as pointing your finger at each other. This situation is most likely to happen when novices debate freely. If you need to point at the other person, you should use a gesture like "please", just put your palms together and reach out to the other person.

Use Mandarin as much as possible. In the formal debate, dialects are ignored by the other side and the judges except as arguments;

6- avoid screaming, dancing, spitting and other situations that damage the image.

Third, how to have a free debate. Free debate is the most intense moment of conflict between the two sides, often the moment of winning or losing, and also the moment when novices are most likely to make mistakes. Let's focus on it

1-stick to your point of view and don't be led by the other side. When a novice enters the stage of free debate, the most common mistake is to forget his own argument and be led by the other side. Whether it is free debate, presentation or question and answer, it is to prove one's point of view, refute the other's point of view, and mainly to prove one's point of view. Don't forget that once the other party keeps asking questions, it will be at a loss and it will be very passive to deal with the other party's problems.

2- Ask questions. Most of the questions of free debate are prepared in advance. If you think that all those wonderful questions are improvised by the players, you are all wet. These problems are fully prepared, carefully scrutinized and carefully organized before the game. When preparing, you should try to answer yourself first, guess how the other person might answer if you can, and ask further questions according to the answer. Both sides of the debate can ask such questions. If you can't figure it out, it means that you haven't found the right method, which is determined by the characteristics of the debate (both sides can distinguish it). Ask questions. If you can't answer them, you'll be fine. You must continue to ask further questions. The party who asks questions often holds the initiative. If the other party refuses to answer and asks questions repeatedly, don't forget to say "Ask your opponent x times, …": P

3- Answer. Answer each other's questions, don't be confused by each other. After reading the above paragraph, you should feel that the questions carefully prepared by the other party are inevitably difficult to answer. Excellent questions are even arguments for the other side's point of view. Once you answer them, you will prove each other instead. What should we do? First of all, we should remember that "proving our point of view is the first priority". When answering, we should also use our arguments and arguments as much as possible. Secondly, we should get a clear view of the clouds and find the fault of the other party's question from the root. Finally, we really find it difficult to answer. Leave him alone. When the other person asks again, he will say, "We have answered this question clearly, so we won't repeat it because of time." Sorry, another teammate ... "... Of course, a competent judge knows at a glance that you lost this time, but the debate can't care about the gains and losses of one city and one village, and the final victory is the key.

4- Wrong number. Finding out the opponent's loopholes may be the debater's favorite thing to do, which is endless fun and often wins a full house:) However, a pair of keen ears can't be practiced in a day or two, and it needs constant practice. Give a few common examples, logical error: the argumentation process of the opposing team is not rigorous and inconsistent, which is a fundamental error. If it is found out, it will take a batch to the end, especially in the case of contradictions between the opposing sides. Common sense mistakes: The other party has made common sense mistakes and must not let them go. Here is a wonderful example: 1993 International Debate Competition for College Students, a contestant from Cambridge University put forward "Singapore President Lee Kuan Yew ……" and asked the other side to explain. Jiang Changjian of Fudan University immediately pointed out that "Lee Kuan Yew is the prime minister of Singapore, not the president." The audience applauded and the other party was humiliated.

Debate contest is a high-tech competition. In the course of the competition, debaters will also use sophistry, stealing concepts, stealing pillars, beating about the bush, paying attention to this and that, etc., to point out the tricks of their opponents, which is of course very popular. However, these techniques are often improvised. Without that team, you are going to argue before the game. Practicing these skills was not done in a day. Of course, it is not so easy to find out such a problem.

In short, by participating in the debate competition and practicing at ordinary times, the debate skills will be obviously improved, which is also helpful to the individual's critical thinking ability and language control ability.