the whole premise of debates kinda bugs me, like I know it's more of a sport than anything, but we're supposed to pretend that a group of people sitting in a locked room can figure out the truth without looking at the world outside.
I had to argue the positive for dropping the bombs on Japan once, so I just did some syllogisms about how life is terrible and instantaneous vaporization by nukes was a peaceful way to end it. Somehow we won...with the premise that killing people is good...debate is meaningless.
debate is meaningless.
Competitive debate is the intellectual equivalent of sport fencing, it is so far removed from the origin that it is completely unrecognisable
Holy fuck how young are the people here? I thought I was talking with adults?
The modern condition is one of perpetual immaturity. We are trapped in the same kidulthood regardless of age.
The main thing I remember from debate at University in the UK was that it was full of vaguely leftwing idpol types (so garden-variety US liberals I suppose) and that the debates themselves typically are supposed to appeal to morality. So make sure your arguments clearly describe how your proposed solutions are actually helping people/the world, and how your opponents are causing more problems?
For chuds, they'll typically propose something that's incredibly vulnerable to exploitation. So you can hit them with the old 'existing power structures mean that you're reinforcing the divide between rich and poor, by in practice restricting <x> to those who can afford it'. It's true for everything from anti-abortion laws to lax environmental regulations to poor worker protections.
Find that part in Teddy Roosevelt's autobiography where he skewers debate nerds for being too pedantic and insufficiently ideological.
If it’s American (or even if it’s not) look up the Cap K. It’s basically saying ‘fuck capitalism upvote if you agree’ but for every debate.
Okay but don't actually because running a Capitalism Kritik has become a meme at this point and has lost my CX friends the round whenever they tried to run it.
Depends highly on which style of debate you're doing. Do you know which one yet?
If you're in the United States, policy debate is a cancerous institution based around proving the opponent's position leads to an existential threat to the species and human civilization (usually global thermonuclear Armageddon). It teaches intellectual dishonesty, sophistry, and to switch positions and ideals as convenient to win the argument. The format of the game is structured in such way that it prioritizes speed of delivery in order to get more arguments on the table than the opposition can respond to in their allotted time over rhetorical skill or passion. In short, it's great preparation for taking on the Shapiros of the world!
Just participate as much as you can. It's an art that you must learn through bitter experience. Do your best, take your lumps, and don't feel defeated when you lose.
I was the PF captain of my circuit debate team back in high shcool and did LD on the side, I won state and haven't done too poorly nationally ;) . I personally loved doing it and wouldn't have traded that time for anything. First off, debate, like any other school activity, should be done for your own enjoyment first. Make friends with people, don't take things too seriously, and have fun with it, 90% of my best debate memories came from outside of rounds. Going along with that, if you're going to do a partner event (which I would recommend), make sure to find yourself a good partner. I knew tons of kids who lost their passion for the event, or never could reach their full potential, because they had a bad partner, or just one they couldn't get along with.
When it comes to actually being in round, be dynamic. You absolutely want to have your blocks and everything well managed so that you can make fast responses to your opponents points, but also make sure that you are prepared to go off script, you sound much stronger and competent that way. In the same way, unless you're doing CX, debate is 30% substance and 70% how you communicate that substance. Try utilizing humor, make topical remarks, always make yourself look more powerful and competent than your opponent. Everything is in the theatrics. I have won rounds where I've had to concede points, I've won rounds where I've had to muddle the topic entirely, I have never won a round where I had to take a pause during crossfire before answering a question, or lost my place in my speech and had to take time to find it, or was tired and sounded weaker than I normally do. Watch speeches given by politicians or debaters and try to emulate things they do, make good use of your hands, take a confident posture, speak clearly and distinctively. I've seen people who clearly attempt to emulate Ben Shapiro and they find a lot of success, and specifically when it comes to people who talk fast, call them out on it. I've found that judges, especially lay judges and ex-debaters from PF tend to really enjoy when you do, and it gives you a leg up on your opponent while also throwing them off their game.
I'll be honest, since you're on Chapo, you're probably going to have a harder time than most when debating. Strong convictions means a tougher time at arguing a side you don't agree with; this applies to both sides, and is why kids I knew who were open fascists and the like would start to crumble if they needed to debate about how we needed to expand low-income housing and such. I've had debates where I argued that private healthcare was good, or that landlords were beneficial, or that taxing the wealthy would harm the economy. The important thing to keep in mind is that debate is not the real world, if it was, there would be a clear choice to everything, but judges don't judge based on who is "right" ( or at least they shouldn't), they judge based on who is most convincing, and you should spend every minute you're speaking thinking of that.
A few little things: don't try to flow on computer unless you type at 160 wpm +, and when you do flow, keep things structured and simple. Use online sources to help find blocks and the like, it makes research much easier on your end and opens yourself up to new arguments and positions. Make your opponents give sources if they didn't already: at worst, they look silly fumbling around for the name of an author, at best, they can't give you one, or provide you with one from a news source or author you can easily debunk. Also, as unfortunate as it is, you should try to dress nice. This matters more than you'd think, and if you don't have the money to go out and buy a suit, try talking to upperclassmen, your debate coach, or checking a local thrift store for one to purchase.
And finally, *NEVER, EVER, EVER DO CX. It is the devil.
Hope this helps, ask if you have any more questions,
-YeForPrez2020
