Skip to content
June 5, 2012 / compassioninpolitics

Revisiting types of argument & critical thinking in debate

I’ve revisited this theme a number of times on the blog. I’m trying to suss out the questions–or instances of distinction which are important.

1. Comparisons, contrasts, reason giving, and prioritization (criteria).
2. Imaging a world of…. (or in a world of….)
3. Perception (psychology of agents or groups of agents)
4. Cause & effect chains
5. Argument interactivity (if we win hegemony….that means….)
6. Argument prioritization (see also #1)

Overgeneralization
Overgeneralization + specific instances otherwise
Overgeneralization + specific types otherwise (that assumes X type or assumes Y type–or it doesn’t assume N, O, or P-type)

You exclude that–and its relevant
We include that–and that inclusion is relevant
Your evidence doesn’t assume X (or include X)

Levels of argument (subpoints build to an overall argument–in pods)
Levels of comparison (and contrast)

Strategy:
1. Pre-emption
2. Going all in (argument focus)
3. Prioritization (aka nexus questions)
4. Going deeper (impacts, analysis, credibility, and comparison)
5. Boxing the other team out (building your argument on “reality” or the best evidence)
6. Efficiency

***** If you don’t say whats most important….the other team will *****

If you don’t prepare….the other team will
If you don’t get better….the other team will
If you don’t…..the other team will…..

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: