DD R

SCOVER DEBATE
Basic Skills for Supporting and Refuting Opinions

Michael Lubetsky / Charles LeBeau / David Harrington
Produced and published by: Language Solutions Incorporated

2000 by Michael Lubetsky, Charles LeBeau, and David Harrington
All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. The persons, entities and events in this book are fictitious. Any similarities to actual persons or entities, past or present, are purely coincidental. Book Design: Language S utions/David Harrington /Chikako Koyama Produdion: Language Solutions Layout: Chikako Koyama Cover/Interior Design: Ty Semaka This edition reprinted and distributed in Korea by Compass Publishing http://www.compasspub.com email: info@compasspub.com
ISBN 978-89-8446-5 1 7-6
O 0
1 we
This book is dedicated to:
anuary 6, 1958 . June 21, 1999

He was our colleague, and our friend. Hewi always be in our hearts.
Brian effrey Moss
To

eTe
he,
This book is an answer to a much debated question: "Is debate possible for low level learners?" We have tried to answer strongly in the affirmative. However, we feel stron y that it is necessary to take a somewhat different approach to debate for low level learners. New concepts and methodologies are required. These are the concepts that have proven successful for us. We hope they, in turn, will be successful for you. Stepping Stones Toward Debate First, this book recognizes that debate is a very sophisticated form of immediate, interactive communication. Debate assumes a high level of discourse skill. Thus, although the goal of the book is debate, Unit 1 begins not with debate but with exchanging opinions. We assume nothing and start from zero. From there, we have paved the way to debate with 9 small, but necessary, steps (units) that can be taken in stride by beginners. This journey is a road of discovery, hence the title of the book. Along the way, we learn how to support opinions with reasons, how to support reasons with evidence, and how to organize information into a coherent message. Continuing down the road, we learn how to refute explanations, how to challenge evidence, and how to organize refutations into a coherent message. Finally, we learn how to make rebuttal arguments, and then, at the end of the journey, we are ready to discover and enjoy debate.
Metaphorically Speaking
Secondly, debate is, by its very nature, abstract. But abstractions are very difficult to teach. So, we have had to find a way of making debate concrete, a way of making the reasoning of debate visible to the students. To this end, we have found comparing debate with constructing a house, attacking a house, and rebuilding a house to be a very powerful metaphor. Thus, throughout the book, the first page of each unit cements the unit's contents to the house concept. Metaphorically speaking, the roof of the house is the topic, or resolution, of the debate. This roof is supported by pillars, or reasons, and the entire house rests on a foundation of evidence. Only careful construction allows a house to withstand the attack of storm and gale, snow and rain, wind and hail. Likewise, only strong reasons and firm evidence allow a debate case to withstand well-aimed refutations. We also learn how to turn the case around and see it from the opposite point of view. In this way, the house metaphor teaches us that debate is about attacking the building, not the builder.
User Friendly Format

Third, knowing that beginners function best in a clearly structured environment, we have endeavored to make each lesson learner friendly. Learners walk through 6 steps. First, they
experience the unit's debate target skill in the Discovery section. Second, learners see the target
skill systematically presented in the Model section. Third, in the Language Focus section, learners practice the language needed for implementing the target skill. Next, the learners experiment with both the language and the unit's target skill in a carefully Controlled
Practice. Now that learners have had adequate practice in both the language and the target
skill, they are ready to place the target skill within the context of debate in the Debate Application. Each unit ends with an assignment, the Project, that asks students to dig into their lives and the mass media to uncover the target skill in action. The Project takes debate beyond the classroom and invites learners to challenge what they see and hear in the world
around them.
Topics: From the Silly to the Sublime

A final note out the debate topics in this book. We have included a full spectrum of topics from the silly to the sublime. But there is a method in our madness. We have used simple
topics (For example: cats vs. dogs, country vs. city) to introduce the new debate skills. Our experience has shown that focusing on both the content (the issues) and the form (debate
skills) overwhelms learners. Rather than discovering the debate skill, students just get lost in the issues. However, this is not to say that there are no challenging topics in this book! We have included tough issues such as capital punishment, gun control, nuclear energy, national service, and economic development in the third world. But we have carefully selected these
topics and placed them to review and consolidate the target skills, not to introduce them. In the final analysis, Discover Debate is not about issues, it is about how we talk about issues.
This book is not about global issues, human rights, or the environment. It is about how we think about, how we talk about, and what we want to do about global issues, human rights, or the environment. To misquote Confucius: Give your students an issue and you feed them for a day. Teach them debate skills, and you feed them for life.
IJ'"' r:TrT n L,l I I r
Unit `
Have An Opinion
CUS
cictice
ication
Your Opinion Opinions of Value, Policy, & Fact Agree or Disagree Opinion Survey
Debate Terms Debate in the News Opinions in the News
Un 2
Explaining Your Opinion
17
age
h
Explaining your Opinion Strong Reasons Compare & Contrast Giving Reasons
oIIed te A pp
Ct
fice
Gimme one reason...

Creating a Questionnaire
nion Brainstorming Reasons
Unit 3
Supporting Your Opinion

31
Supporting your Opinion Types of Support $ Giving Supports
ke
One, Two, Three
Pli, ion
Case Study
Researching Supports
ct
Unit 4
Organizing Your Opinion
47
Contr& L cictice Strip Speech

Debate 7 piicaton
Project
Organizing your Opinion Signposts Macro and Micro Organization for the 1AC cus Debate Introductions and Conclusions
Present your House

Letter to the Editor
Unit 5
Refuting Explanations
over lel
L: re Focus
C
61
Refuting Opinions
Refuting an Opinion Types of Refutations
irol d Practice
Stating a Refutation Point Refutation
Debate Application
Project
Making Refutations Tennis Debate
Critiquing an Editorial
75
Unit 6
Chal-enging Supports
scov
eI
Challenging Supports
Testing Supports
Asking Questions
Refuting a Source
trolled P,

Question Supports
Challenge Supports Question & Refute Critiquing an Advertisement
cite Apphcation
ect
Uni '
Organizing Your Refutation
89
'0de uage
OrganÌZing your Refutati n

Macr0 0rganizati n for the 1 NC
Focus
Micr Organization for the 1 1 C

The 1 NC Refutation Format M ini.Debate
trolled Practice
cite Application
Responding to an Editorial
103
Unit 8
Debating An Opinion
scove
del
Debating an Opinion
4
ractice " ition
Debate Formats Responding to Attacks The Rebuttal
Rebuttal Speeches Flowing a Debate

Debate Chain
Unit 9
DISCOVer Debate
ions
Flow a Complete Debate

Topics Advanced Topics
Append ices
Transcripts
25
35
Stude"ts
Hey, what is this book about? "Discover Debate"
makes debate as simple as building a house!
In Unit 1, we prepare the roof of the house.
r D e e es
In unit 2, we support the roof with strong pillars and walls.
es ee
Then, in Unit 3, we build
Care
a strong foundation to support the house. After building your house, we learn how to explain it in Unit 4.
Cats Make Better Pets Than
Dogs
)0
Cost
OO O
Care
25% cheaper
Can walk themselves
In Units 5, 6, 7, we learn how to attack the other

team's house.
3Cats Make Better Pets Than Dogs
Finally, in Units 8 and 9,

we are ready to discover
Cost
`9 0 e
and enjoy debate!
25% cheaper
Can walk themselves
[ B D D uuuu
nD
ogn
q
rt\ 0
l
D
0
n \-U O
7 n
o n n U -
0 0
0 00
J J
0000 r1
Oc O
O i O.
0.
Jb 0 0 00
/ L I) H f
D,7
10
Everyone has opinions! This New Yorker thinks that the city is better than the country. What do you think? Do you agree with his opinion? Do you disagree? What is your opinion?
Read the following opinions. What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with the statements under the pictures. Check (V) the box next to either AGREE or - DISAGREE.
::
rf
1. Math is the most important subject!
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
2. The government should lower taxes!
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
0. . OP
3. Cats are better pets than dogs!
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
4. Eating fast food is not healthy!
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
z 27 ZZ
f 22 21
2 Zz
2 2 1
uZ
5. Soccer is more exciting than baseball! 6. U.F.O.'s have already visited Earth!
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
I AGREE.
I DISAGREE.
ir k1' '1F-{1'k.
Compare your opinions in this exercise with the opinions of your classmates. Did you and your classmates all a or disagree with the same opinions? Did you sometimes have different opinions? Do you always agree with everyone else's opinion? Do you sometimes disagree? Debate starts when two people have different opinions about the same idea.
3
Run to the Corner Game

Listen to the opinion and decide whether you agree or disagree. Run to the corner marked AGREE or DISAGREE according to your decision. Repeat for each opinion.
Opinions of Va-ue, Policy, & Fact

Opinion is the starting point of discussion or debate. Remember that an opinion forms the roof of your debate house which in turn is supported by the pillars and walls of reasons and a foundation of evidence. Just as a roof can have different shapes, opinions can have different types. Opinions usually fal- into three main types: Value, Policy, and Fact.
U .
Fr
Opinions of Value state that one thing is better than another. For example: I think that dogs are better pets than cats.
Opinions of Policy say that the government or some other type of authority such as your company management or school administration should do something. For example: I Zeel that the government should lower taxes.
in o i .
Read the sentences on the right. Decide whether they are Opinions of Value, Opinions of Policy, or Opinions of Fact and write the appropriate number in the space given. The first one is done for you.
Opinions of Value
Opinions of Fact
Opinions of Fact state that som ething is true, was true, or will become true. For example: The Earth is getting warmer.
O a 00 0 OdOO.
Cats make better pets than dogs. Math is more important than English. U.F.O.'s have already visited Earth. The government should raise taxes. Soccer is more exciting than baseball. Eating fast food will make you fat. City life is better than country life. Students should not have to wear uniforms. This company should hire more women. The deserts of the world are getting larger.
5
Opinions of p icy
Agree or Disagree
When someone gives you an opinion you should respond. The other side ot having an opinion is responding to someone else's opinion. Depending on the situation, you can
..
'
=Oy.0. OPi0.
respond strongly, (I strongly agree/disagree!) or you can respond weakly (I guess so). You can respond formally (I couldn't agree with you more!) or informally (Yuck!!!).
Study the language in the Opinion and Response Boxes below with a partner. One
partner gives an opinion, the other partner gives a response.
OPINION BOX
RESPONSE BO
I think that
cats are better pets than dogs.
I believe tli at
D
Q
there will be an earthquake in Tokyo next year.
I'm certain that
swimming is better exercise than walking.
Not me!
I feel that
LJ
the government should lower taxes.
Nle too.
(no thing)
Soccer is more fun than

baseball.
I think so
too.

OPINION BOX
'6
RESPONSE B x
I agree (that...) (with...) I disagree (that...) (with...)
. .
I think that cats are better pets than dogs. I believe that there will be an earthquake in Tokyo next year. I'm certain that 0 swimming is better exercise than walking. I feel that the government should lower taxes.
(nothing)
Soccer is more fun than hasehill
Not me!
OPin l 0 .
Me too.
I think so too.
PAIRWORK ` Partner A goes first. Partner B starts at the top of the next page. State the following opinions to Partner B. Partner B wi B makes the correct response as written below.
respond. Check to see if Partner
0 0 0
response.
r.i M
A: I 'm certain that dogs are better pets than cats.
B: Not me. I love cats. A: I feel that summer is better than winter
B: I disagree with you. I like to ski. A: It is more interesting to watch videos than to go to the theater.
B: I think so too. It is really nice to stay home.
A: I think that smoking cigarettes is dirty.
B: Me too! I would never even want to start.

state some opinions. Pick the best response from
PAIRWORK 2 Partner B wi
the two given for each opinion. Your partner wi
tel- you if you chose the correct
B: Listen to Person B's opinion and respond. A: I disagree with you. I love watching Basketball. A: I disagree with you. Soccer is my favorite sport. A: I think so too. I'm worried about the future. A: I don't
B: Listen to Person B's opinion and respond.
ink so. Rainforests are very important for the future.
L1*
'i'A : s:
: i cs :t

A: Me too. It's my favorite dessert. A: Me too. I need to stop eating it so that I can lose weight.

A: Not me! I think they're ugly. A: I agree that frogs are ugly animals.
7
J Z
OPINION BOX
cats are better pets than dogs.
RESPONSE BOX
I think that I believe that

I'm certain that =OJ`. 0.
I agree (that...) (with...)

I disagree (that...) (with...
there will he an earthquake in Tokyo next year.
I feel that
swimming is better exercise than walking. the government should lower taxes.
Soccer is more fun than baseball.
Not me!
(nothing)
too. I th ink so too.

4e
OPi.io.
8
Partner B
PAIR WORK ` Partner A starts from the top of the previous page. Partner B starts
here. Partner A wi-- state some opinions. Pick the best response from the two given for each opinion. Your partner wi-- tel- you if you chose the correct response. A: Listen to Person A's opinion and respond. B: Not me. I love cats. B: I agree. I love cats. A: Listen to Person A's opinion and respond. B: I disagree with you. I like to ski. B: Not me. I love elephants. A: Listen to Person A's opinion and respond. B: I think so too. It is really nice to stay home. B: I think so too. It's good to get out of the house.
. 14]lJ .!
A: Listen to Person A's opinion and respond. B: Me too! I would never even want to start. B: Me too! I like to eat healthy foods.
PAIRWORK 2 State the following opinions to Partner A. Partner A wi-- respond.
Check to see if Partner A makes the correct response as written below. A: I think that basketball is a more interesting sport than soccer. B: I disagree with you. Soccer is my favorite sport. A: I feel that we should stop cutting trees in the rainforests. B: I think so too. I'm worried about the future. A: I'm certain that chocolate makes you fat. B: Me too. I need to stop eating it so that I can lose weight. A: I think that frogs are cute. B: Not me! I think they are ugly.
We exchange opinions on many different topics as part of our daily communication with friends, family, classmates, and co-workers. Not only do we have to give our opinions, but we are expected to agree or even disagree with other people's opinions.
1 1 . 0.
Listen to these four model conversations at the party. Can you guess the topic of
=OJ . `
each conversation? Write the conversation topics in the boxes below. Do the speakers agree or disagree with each other? Are they talking about an opinion of fact, value or policy? Fill in the boxes.
2 -1
'\ 'i
qZ
<F> - ,,
Topi C'.
Disagree
F
0
D
LII Agree
LilFact EliValue [lIP icy
OTopic:
LI Agree LI Disagree
LiliFact LiValue PiPolicy
or`> 0
: QD ,
l " 7
,V
OTopic:
LilAgree
Disagree
PO
Fact LiliValue [IlliPolicy
Agree Disagree
LilFact LiliValue LiPolicy
, / rU
r r7 I , L ` , l L ,1 Ik'1 ` IL II L L
Opinion Survey
=n
=OJ`.0.
Make your own questionnaire for a survey. Complete the sentences in the boxes below.
OPi ni
h.
r I think that
tastes better than
(food) is more interesting than
(food)
itiL' 1
'`
n
(school subject) I feel that playing (sport)
(school subject) is more fun than playing

(sport)
I feel that the government should
I think that schools should

I am certain that
The world will become

'r J'*
f
''8 r u r
Take a survey. Read your sentences to 5
people. They should agree or disagree

with your statements. Mark their responses below.
Report the results of your survey of 5 people. Did most people agree or
disagree with your opinion?

=OJ`. 0.
qL
gree
Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
gree,
Disagree
Agree Disagree
Agree Disagree
ree Disagree
gree
Disagree Agree Disagree
rm
JI
U&-i

tastes better than
(food)
(food)
Most people agree/disagree that
Most people agree/disagree that is more interesting than (school subject) (school subject)
Most people agree/disagree that playing _ is more fun than playing _

(sport) (sport)
Most people agree/disagree that the government should
Most people agree/disagree that schools should
Most people agree/disagree that the world will become
_ 0 .5-S
0 -e
Debate Terms
There are some special terms used in debate. The opinion in a debate is called the Proposition or Resolution. The debate team that agrees with the resolution is called the Affirmative Team. The team that disagrees with the resolution is the Negative Team. The people in charge of evaluating the debate are called Judges.
Look at the illustration below. Label the illustration with the debate words from the
word box below.

.. =OJ`. 0.
O 1
"C^,'r 1l4 c
7174 do t. ,,
D' O
p
0
Judge
Affirmative Team
Res ution
Audience
Negative Team
Debate in the News 1

Debate is an important part of life. The newspaper is filled with debates. People state their opinions, agree or disagree with each other, or agree or disagree with government, company, or school policy.
Read these opinions from the news. Find the resolution that best matches the issue in
Un . =O 0.
the story. Write the number of the resolution in the circle provided.
r "7`
. lION
O . 1 1
RESOLUTION NUMBER
J/
Whales should he protected.

2. RESOLUTION
LONDON (AP)-Figures released last week showed manufacturing, consumer spending, and construction
The number of fish is declining
because the big ones are eating the

small ones.
of new housing all down from a year ago. Even though these economic indicators show signs of a further
economic slowdown, the Prime Minister's office Tuesday released a statement showing confidence in the economy. "The fact that interest rates have not increased indicates a healthy, recovering economy," said the Prime Minister's spokesperson.
3,
JLUTION Canadian fish are tastier than Australian beef.

RESOLUTION
4.
The government should take action to improve the economy.

5. RESOLUTION
The government should not allow the catching of whales.

0
6. RiJ OLUTION
Ce
Workers should try to help the economy more.

RESt ! JTION
Ll
IM I--.
RESOLUTION NUMBER
OSAKA (Reuters)-A new organization, Consumers United, held its first annual
conference here yesterday. The group,

founded in January of last year, aims to
Overfishing off the Newfoundland coast destroys fishing.

8. RESOLUTION
promote consumer rights in Japan. The

main issue of discussion yesterday was
The economy is getting better.

9. RESOLUTION
ways the government can help the

average consumer by improving the economy. Said conference organizer Ichitaro Shintaro, "The government is
All of the whales in aquariums and amusement parks should be set free.
; ;i. RESOLUTION It is better to eat fish than to eat beef.
not doing anything about the economy.

The government needs to take a more active role."
f
, RESOLUTION
Whales should not eat people.

RESOLUTION NUMBER MARINELAND (LA Daily News)-
More debate in the news! Here are

three more newspaper clippings. Read them. Look again at the resolutions
below and find the resolution that best wtli
Early this morning dozens of people
matches the issue presented. Write the number of the resolution in the circle
provided.
P O
gathered at this famous amusement park to demand the release of all whales. The protesters carried signs
saying "Free The Whales Now!" Tom Green, the leader of the
1 . RESOLUTION Whales should be protected. 2. RESOLUTION The number of fish is declining because the big ones are eating the small ones. 3. RESOLUTION Canadian fish are tastier than Australian beef. 4. RESOLUTION The government should take action
protesters, said in an interview that "whales were born free and they should live free."
0.
TORONTO (Toronto Times)-A
showed that the number of fish is
Canadian study released Monday
to improve the economy.

5. RESOLUTION The government should not allow
l
rapidly declining off the shores of Newfoundland. This area, famous for
fishing for centuries, has suffered
recently from overfishing. The study showed that, in particular, large fish hut disappeared.
the catching of whales.

6. KESOLUTION
near the top of the food chain have all

12 Weekly news
Workers should try to help the economy more.

7. RESOLUTION Overfish i ng off the Newfoundland coast destroys fishing.
RESOLUTION THEN
ADIAN
rrF
linh'
FISHERMAN'S MARKET
nn IFn n u
8. RESOLUTION The economy is getting better.

9. RESOLUTION
All of the whales in aquariums and amusement parks should be set free.
0. RESOLUTION It is better to eat fish than to eat beef. 1. RESOLUTION
rllliFTI
u m
Whales should not eat people.
Debate in the News 2

Read the following two stories from the news. Can you think of the issue being debated? Write a resolution based on each story.
`07
RESOLUTION
ZURICH-The International
TOJ Ot OPi.i
Olympic Committee is beginning the final round of discussion for deciding the host of the 3rd Olympics of the new millennium. An Olympic official, who asked not to be named, said the main contenders are still Beijing, China; Cape Town, South Africa and Toronto, Canada. The official said that competition between the n very inmen
with each city ins ;ting it is the best site. The Olympic committee is still not sure in which city the Games should be held.
,/'
RESOLUTION
WASHINGTON DC-The American Red Cross announced yesterday that there is a dangerous shortage of blood in several hospitals throughout the nation. A spokesperson for the
Red Cross said that more and more
Americans have stopped giving blood. In particular, it seems that the number of high school and university students giving blood has declined. Compared with a decade ago, donations by young people are down by about 68%. The spokesperson said that giving blood was perfectly safe and not painful.
T/
15
Opinions in the News

=O 00 i
O
0.
Debate is not just something that we study in the classroom. Debate is something that
happens a-- around us. When you look outside the classroom, you wi-- begin to notice
how much the debate ski-Is you are studying are used in the rea- world. This Project asks
you t ook for debates in newspapers.
n Look through a recent

newspaper or magazine. Find an article that expresses an opinion.
Cut out the article.
Glue the article to a

piece of paper.
Write a resolution for the article. It can be a resolution

of value, policy, or fact.
U Bring your article with its resolution to class and give it to your teacher.
16

nU
[
O O
^n"U
HU U
C
Un f ip Ex Ploinin gyour o in o i n
Tr-
11 A
` V f:,'-Ti
Explaining your Opinion

Sugar bombs are , better than Hyper Holes!
Are
you, find reasonable and convincing.
not!
Are tool Are no l
Everyone has opinions but opinions do not stand by themselves! Opinions are based on
reasons which must be explained. Without explaining the reasons for an opinion,
communication breaks down and becomes childish as with the two children in the illustration
above. When explaining, the key point is to provide reasons that other people, not just
to the short conversations. What is each person's opinion? What reason do they Li Ste fl g ive? Write the reason under each picture. The first one is done for you.

1. Opinion: Math is the most important subject.

REASON:we We
2. Opinion: U.F.O.'s have already

visited Earth.
REASON:
Un . p
i. . g iy P ' O . 1 1
3. Opinion: Living in the city is better than living in the country.

REASON:
4. Opinion: The government should lower taxes.

REASON:
_
Eating fast food
Lar brge 1Z flules
IZ
0 '
00 I
5. Opinion: Soccer is more exciting than baseball.

REASON:
6. Opinion: Eating fast food is not

healthy.
REASON:
Were you convinced by the reasons? Which reasons were convincing? Which reasons were not? In debate, your job is to convince a judge or an audience to agree with your opinion by providing reasonable explanations. It is the judge's job to decide which team's explanations are most convincing and thus who wins the debate. In this exercise you were the judge. You decided which explanations were reasonable and which were not.
19
Strong Reasons
An opinion is like the roof on a house. A roof needs walls, or it wi fa I- down. Similarly, an opinion needs reasons, or it too wi fa I-. Reasons are like walls. Some walls are strong and hold up the roof wel-. Other walls are very weak and can't hold up the roof we I-. Similarly, reasons can be strong or weak. In debate, the audience and judges decide if a reason is strong or weak.
n-'
' P . 1 1 y P O i. i
20
A strong reason must logically support the opinion. A strong reason must be specific and state the idea clearly. A strong reason must be convincing to a majority of people.
You are the judge. Read the opinions and the three reasons that follow them. Check the box next to the reason you think is the strongest.
1. Cats are better pets than dogs...

a. because cats can see better in the dark. b. because cats are cleaner.
c. because hot dogs have mustard; cats don't.
2. It is better to live in the country than the city...

a. because the country has more good things. b. because I like it.
c. because the environment is cleaner.
3. Teenagers should not smoke...

a. because it makes their breath smell bad. b. because I don't like to smoke. c.because many people who begin smoking as teenagers later develop cancer.
4. It is better to be single than married...
5. The rain forests of the world should be protected...
a. because some married people are not happy. b. because single people have more exciting, interesting lives. c. because married people have more lovers.
a. because rain forests are natural. b. because rain forests produce oxygen. c.because trees are needed for wood to build houses.
Compare & Contrast

When giving reasons we often make a Comparison, show a Contrast, or show a Cause-and-Effect relation. Comparisons are used when we want to emphasize a difference or an advantage. We make use of Contrast when we want to emphasize that two things are opposites. We use Cause-and-Effect to emphasize results or to show a potential result when something is done or when something is not done.
. p
y
i. n i ` P O
Each of the files below contains different language patterns for Comparison, Contrast, and Cause-and-Effect. Study the three files below, then try the language exercise on pages 23 and 24 with a partner.
0.
Cats catch mice; dogs don't. Cats are clean; dogs aren't. Cats can take care of themselves; dogs can't. Cats don't bother your neighbors; dogs do. Cats will leave you alone; dogs won't.
If the government raises taxes, then all the roads can be repaired. If the government doesn't raise taxes, all the roads cannot be repaired.
Smoking causes cancer.
Cancer is caused by smoking. If smoking causes cancer, people shouldn't smoke. If cancer is caused by smoking, you should stop smoking.
21
Debate Delivery
MANNER In debate, your goal is to convince the judge and audience that your opinion is correct. Ib convince the judge and audience, you must have strong matter, which means strong reasons, supports, and refutations. However, in addition to strong matter, you also need strong manner, which means that you must speak in a way that is interesting, not boring. Manner includes gestures, eye contact, posture, voice, and humor. GESTURES Use gestures when you speak. For example, show one, two, or three fingers when you begin your first, second, or third point. You can make a fist to show that you are angry, or you can point to the other team when you paraphrase their points. When you are not making a gesture, let your hands relax. Don't play with your pen, fix your hair, hold the table, or rest your head on your hands while you are speaking. EYE CONTACT While you are speaking, you should look at the udge and audience. Do not look out the window, at the floor, at your partner, or at the other team. You want to convince the judge and audience, so you must speak directly to them. Of course, you can read evidence and check your notes, but don't keep your head buried in your notebook. I ook i often to make eye contact with the judge and audience. POSTURE Posture is also very important when you are speaking. To convince the judge and audience, you must look strong and confident. You should stand up straight, balanced on both feet, with your shoulders back, and head up high. Don't slouch, wobble, or lean on the table. You can walk a bit between making points, but not while delivering them. VOICE Voice control is very important. You must speak clearly, and loud enough so that everyone in the room can hear you. Also, many people become nervous when they speak, and they speak very softly in a monotone. Monotone means that every word has the same speed, volume, and pitch. Monotonous speeches are boring. The judge and audience will want to fall asleep! When you speak, you should show emotion in your voice. You should vary your speed, _ volume, and pitch. For example, you should stress the important words in each sentence. You should become louder or softer during the most important parts of your speech, and you should pause and change your voice between points. HUMOR Finally, when you are giving your speech, you will make the judge and audience very happy if you can make them ; laugh. Always remember that debate should be fun!
22
Giving Reasons
= p .
PAIRWORK Now, let's practice giving reasons! Use the forms for comparison, contrast,
and cause-and-effect in these four dialogs. Partner A looks at this page. Partner B uses
the next page.
Partner
l in . . iy ' ' O in
Dialog `
What do you think of Apple computers?
(Write Partner B's opinion: Why? .)
(Write Partner B's reason:
.)
Dialog 2
(Write Partner B's question: .)
I think that orange juice is better than coffee. (Listen to Partner B's question!) Orange juice is (healthy/than)coffee. Besides, coffee keeps you awake; orange juice doesn't.
Dialog 3
I think that everyone should own small cars.
(Write Partner B's opinion: .)
Are you kidding? Why? (Write Partner B's reason: .)
Dialog 4
01(Write Partner B's question: .)
"h
Well, I'm certain that the government should not pay for all their medical costs! (Listen to Partner B's question!) Because if the government pays all medical costs, then it will have to raise taxes!
23
= . p 1.-.
` P O i
24
`
PAIRWORK Now, let's practice giving reasons! Use the forms for comparison, contrast, and cause-and-effect in these dialogs. Partner B looks at this page. Partner A uses the
previous page.
Partner B
Dialog `
(Write Partner A's question: _.) . Fm certain ttiat Apple computers are Detter tuan Windows computers.
I'l
Listen to Yartner I-VS questiom' because Apple computers are (easy/use/tflan) Windows computers.
Dialog 2
Which do you prefer, orange juice or coffee?
(Write Partner A's opinion: -.) Really, why is that? (Write Partner A's reason: _.)
Dialog 3
(Write Partner A's question:
Oh, I disagree! I think big cars are better.

(Listen to Partner A's question!)
Because large cars are (safe/than) small cars and large cars are better for families.
Dialog 4
What do you think the government should do for old people? (Write Partner A's opinion: _.) Why not?
(Write Partner A's reason: .)
'b"
Iq
rrn'rnL !Gi
Gimme One Reason...
= . = y . =
PAIRWORK Partner A looks at this page, Partner B looks at page 26. First, both
partners prepare by reading al- the reasons in their REASON BOXES. Partner A says "Give
me one reason why..." and reads an opinion from the OPINION BOX below. Partner B
answers with the best reason from the REASON BOX. Then, Partner B says "Give me one reason why..." and reads an opinion from their OPINION BOX. Partner A looks at the REASON BOX below and answers. Repeat until al- opinions and reasons have been used.
"Give me one reason why...
teenagers should not smoke!
drinking too much alcohol is not healthy!

the government should raise taxes!
. it will rain tomorrow! cats are better pets than dogs!

only police should have guns!
the city is better than the country! coffee is better than orange juice! Apple computers are better than Windows computers!
. REASON BOX Partner ^
Because
have an accident.
they may
Because it is safer. All the criminals live

in the city!
Because they produce

less air pollution.
Because if taxes are lower the economy will get better.
Because students need more female role models.
Because if they do
smoke, their children
will probably smoke,
too.
Because they can guard your house and protect you;
cats can't.
Because the hardware and software is cheaper.
Because it has vitamin

C; coffee doesn't.
25
' P O in i .p E P x . 1 1 y
26
PAIRWORK Partner B looks at this page, Partner A looks at page 25. First, both
partners prepare by reading al- the reasons in their REASON BOXES. Partner A says "Give me one reason why..." and reads an opinion from the OPINION BOX on page 25. Partner B answers with the best reason from the REASON BOX. Then, Partner B says "Give me one reason why..." and reads an opinion from the OPINION BOX. Partner A looks at the REASON
BOX on page 25 and answers. Repeat until all opinions and reasons have been used.
REASON BOX Partner B
Because there are not as many jobs in

the country.
smoke, they might get cancer as young adults.
Because if they do
Because Macintosh
computers have better graphics.
Because it has to
provide better
medical care for older people.
Because most people don't know how to use guns safely.
Because it causes
liver damage.
Because it helps you
stay awake; orange juice doesn't.
Because they are easier to take care of.
"Give me one reason why..." parents should not smoke!
people shouldn't use telephones while driving! the government should reduce taxes! universities should have more female professors! dogs are better pets than cats! the country is better than the city!
orange juice is better than coffee!
Windows computers are better than Apple computers!

small cars are better than big cars!
ral nstormi
Two important tools for building a strong case in debate are Brainstorming, and Prioritizing. One way to Brainstorm, or to think and seek out possible ideas, is to make a word map. Look at this example.
Braunstormin
e-m.fve-c MIc& a mk-e
a
Starting from one keyword, in this case CAT, think of as many related words as you can and write them around the keyword. Now write as many words as you can that relate to those words. Write whatever comes to mind. Don't afwajc, try to organize your thoughts just yet.
i
c_heap
c-a- food
1 EvaIuatin. Look at the word map. Do some of the dog. words listed suggest reasons why a cat '"c-ow \` would make a better pet than a dog? Do some of the words suggest reasons / why a cat would not be a better pet pc-hLing. than a dog? Write down all the reasons '
you think of.
r Prioritizi,
-A
j
Jf
anImal X \
p UY
After you have written down many reasons, it is time to prioritize the reasons, that is, to put the reasons in order from most important to least important. Here are the reasons we found in our example word map for why "A cat would make a better pet than a dog.'' a. Cats catch mice. e. Cats are cute; dogs are not. f. Dogs are dirty; but cats are clean. b. Cats are cheaper than dogs. c. Cats sleep a lot. g. Cats are quiet; dogs are noisy. d. Cats have 4 legs. Which do you think is the most important? Which do you think is the least important? Rank the reasons in order from most to least important.
Most Important Least Important
P'
X'
VflgIc
c-ar
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
27
Brainstorm Reasons
In debate, you need to find strong reasons quickly to support your case. The debate application on these two pages is a contest to help you think of reasons quickly. An
important part of debate is being able to see both sides of an issue. This exercise wi also help you learn to appreciate both sides of a resolution.
p . n i i y' O . 1 1
28
reasons for Resolution i on the next page, "Dogs make better pets than cats." Write as many reasons as you can in 4 minutes. At the end of 4 minutes, count the number of reasons. Which team brainstormed the most reasons?
I.ii.Li Now, change groups and follow the same steps for Resolution 2.
Continue to change groups and brainstorm and prioritize for Resolutions 3 through 5.
n.r
In groups of 3 or 4, brainstorm
When your team is finished brainstorming, prioritize your reasons from best to worst. Write your team's
, best reasons on the blackboard.
L
Zk
--
,`
7\/
r
Look at the other teams'
reasons. Do they have the same reasons? Do similar reasons have the same priority in all groups?
RESOLUTION "Dogs make better pets than cats."

Reasons
i . n i ' ' O 1. 1 . p P y
RESOLUTION "Soccer is better than baseball." Reasons
RESOLUTION "Baseball is better than soccer." Reasons
RESOLUTION "Traveling overseas is better than traveling in this country."

Reasons
RESOLUTION "Traveling in this country is better than traveling overseas."

Reasons
29
Creating
Question noire
This is a project in prioritizing reasons.
O Ex'ini y' =. p .
0.
1. Think of a product and brainstorm reasons why people buy it.
2. Make a questionnaire like the one on the clipboard below. 3. Take a survey. Ask several people to prioritize the reasons. 4. Analyze your data and find the most important reasons. 5. Report the data using the sentences below.
Reasons for buying a soft dri

flk.
Most
Important
Least
Price (Low price) 1

Taste (Good tast

2 3 4 5
Important

3 4 5
0-`
5
2 3 4
Calot1 es (Low ca0fle)
(GOOd ag
n o
After your I chose
survey, complete the following sentences:
for my questionnaire topic. reason/s for buying it. I found the most important reason/s to be
I brainstormed
30
C
' . 3 5 y * 1 P O
`' '' _ ` ' ' 'T 11'
Supporting your Opinion
In my opinion the country is much better

than the city...
because there are
For example, in
the country you can go fishing,
hiking. rock climbing, and
more fun things to

do in the country than in the city.
hang-gliding.

'
0 In the city, if there is

a car accident, there will
0.
. 1-V * ' TT
n
TI1
32
r' l L
In Unit 2, we learned that good debate requires strong reasons. But these reasons must
have solid support to stand strong and support an opinion. In the opinion of the man above, the country is better than the city. His reason is that there are more things to do in the country. What is his support?
Read the supports below. Find the reason it supports on the right page. Write the letter of
the support in the circle next to the reason it supports.
0 In the country, there

are fewer factories, fewer cars, and therefore less
0 According to the
National Police Agency, crime in the city is three times higher than in the
country.
be a big traffic jam and you will be late for work.
pollution.
'` t'
When you walk in city, you hear horns, cars, trains, and loud
music.
0 I used to live in a
small town. I knew
0 According to the
famous Dr. Hoo, city life
causes stress. (PBS
everyone and everyone knew me. We all helped

each other.
Journal of Health, 1999)
The country is better than the city because the people
better than the city

because the coun ` is cleaner.
The country is '
it 3 - Su Ppor n. y i our o pinion
try
are. friendlier.
the city because there is less crime in the country thai, in the city.
The country is better than
o gu n
the city because getting to

and from work is easier than iii the city. _
The country is better than
B B
1 2
27
rt
....
The country is better than the city because the country is quieter. B
J
La burgers ' m'Jes

_
t
The country is better than the city because the country

is less stressful than
the city.
12
7L-
fl F Ir lk1' '1 Fi{1'L-]

There are many different ways of supporting reasons. How many different types were
used in this exercise?
33
n' Types of Support
Once an opinion is given and the reasons for holding that opinion are clearly explained, those reasons need to be supported with evidence. Evidence is the concrete foundation that supports the walls and pillars that hold up the Opinion, the roof of our house. Evidence can be in the form of an Explanation, an Example, Statistics or the Opinion of an Expert in the field.
5. * . g iy ' O
Read the Opinions, Reasons and Supports below. Decide whether the Support given is an Explanation, Example, Statistic or an Expert Opinion. Write your answer in the space provided. The first one is done for you.
Cats are better pets than dogs. This is because cats are easier to care for than dogs.
c cc0 At the CATS'R US pet shop, a cat costs $100 while a dog costs $200. OMy friend had a really big dog, a Great Dane. That dog cost so much
0.
to keep because it ate so much food that they had to give it away.
0 Cats are smaller so they eat less food, and therefore you spend less money.
_0 According to the book published in 1998, "How to Choose a Pet" by Dr. Silverhair, cats are cheaper than dogs.
Cats are better pets than dogs. This is because cats are easier to care for than dogs.
m 0 It takes about 1: minutes a day to care for a cat; it takes about an hour to care for a dog. O My cat can take care of itself when I go away. It saves its food instead of eating it all at once. 0 Cats are independent. They clean themselves, they walk themselves, they don't need care and attention everyday. -O According to a 1998 article in Cat Magazine by the famous animal doctor, Dr. Foxglove, cats don't need care everyday.
34
This woman believes that the government should lower taxes. She offers her Opinion
with a reason and 4 different types of supports.
U . 3
Label her supports: Example, Statistic, Expert Opinion or Explanation.
' P i.i 5 . y O
The government should lower taxes. Lower taxes will help the economy.
If taxes are 1
mflore anu giv
money t spe
e more
will sell hs.
When America lowered taxes a few years ago, people bought more things.
ccording to Dr. MaxI Moneybags of

will i ne help vaiiy business. rconomist, iowering taxes
orate sales tIes fell by '% when our government raisea taxes last year.
This man believes that the government should raise taxes. Write the letter of the sentence
on the right that best fits the label on the left. The first one is done for you.
Opinion L
Tax increases in Sweden have irnpr ved
the quality of go vernment services tor everyone in that country.
Support 1 L
Expert Opinion
The government needs more money to

provide better services.
Support 2 Statistic
Support 3
Without more money the government can't provide training for people without
jobs.
Explanation Support 4
Example
According to the Finance Minister,

important services will have to be cut if
taxes are not increased.
The
Listen and check your answers.
35
Giving Supporis
First, study the language files below on the four types of supports. (Note that some of the
S. PI ' OPi.i ? . 1
36
language used for Explanations is based on the cause-and-effect pattern from the previous
unit's Language Focus.) Then, choose one phrase from each file and complete it with your
own words. Say them to a partner.
For example, my cat can...

When I go away for the weekend, my cat can...
For instance, my cat can... Let me give an example, my cat can...
zo% of all women own...

One out of 5 women own...
One in women own...

1/c of all women own..
According to Dr. Silvercat, most cats... A recent article in Cat Lover's Magazine stated that most cats... Dr. Silvercat, the famous animal doctoi said that most cats... To quote Dr. Silvercat, "Most cats..."
If If
we don't feed our dogs, they will... we didn't feed our dogs, they would...
Cats are independent, so...

Because cats are independent..
The supports below are missing some important key words! Use language from the
S. P P . 3 y . 1 ` . 1 1 O
four files on the previous page to complete the sentences below. Write your answers in the spaces provided.
1. year.
he Economist magazine stated that the economy will improve next
2. In his latest book, Professor Kinsey of Harvard University doubt that smoking causes cancer. 3. 4.
there is fl()
the world stopped trading with South Africa, apartheid ended. , my grandmother smoked two packs of cigarettes everyday and she died of lung cancer.
we
5. 5'
save the rainforest the world

give tests, students
die.
not
teachers study.
7. Cellular phones are getting smaller 8. Technology is getting better

9. 10.
technology is getting better. cellular phones are getting smaller.
days of the week begin with the letter "5". months of the year have 30 days.
of the year.
11. The winter months cover
12.If you spent 8 hours a day sleeping and lived to be 75 years old you would have spent of your life asleep. 13.The number of fish in the ocean has declined greatly over the last 20 years. _, in the 1970's, there was a lot of salmon off the coasts of Oregon and Washington. Now, the salmon have almost disappeared.
14.
the government
not increase.
take action, the number of salmon
37
L,` '
Lf i 7 r.i I ` , I" ` ,' ` ` `
One, Two, Three

Form groups of 3 people. The first person reads one of the opinions from the first column
below, the second person then reads the reason that best follows that opinion. The third
S. P . . g -. y ' P O i0. 38
r:
because the
than tea...
Coffee is better
electro-magnetic
waves affect the airplane's guidance
system.
The government taxes on

should raise gasoline...
Smoking should
restaurants. . .
be banned in all
Wearing glasses
is better than wearing contact lenses...
you awake.
since coffee keeps
d buildings should be torn
down and replaced...
F
There should be no scho
because school uniforms are not

comfortable.
uniforms...
Cellular phones shouldn't be allowed on
airplanes...
We should take our next

vacation in the United States... because contact lenses can cause permanent eye problems.
J
Basketball is much more

exciting than
soccer...
The government
whales...
should ban the killing of
person in the group then reads the support that best matches the Opinion and Reason given. Continue until all Opinions, Reasons, and Supports have been used.
0 . 3.5 * 1 ' .O
!O
because it can
cause health
For example, old buildings often collapse in
problems for the other customers.

S
earthquakes.
too cold in the winter and toe hot in the summer.
They are often
Each cup of
because the United States has

many famous
amusement
coffee contains about 105 caffeine.

milligrams of
) '
parks.
U
Disneyworld are both in the United States.
For example, Disneyland and
Ibecause whales
are highly
l 1
For instance, a typical soccer score is 1 to 0. A typical basketball
inte
sim i
ligent beings
score is 96 to 91 .
ar to humans.
touch your eyes you can cause an infection.
Every time you
because there is much more scoring in basketball than

soccer.
W S c recent airplane accidents have been connected with inflight phone use.
Y I Many stLldies
j nave sflown tflat
X I With higher
taxes people
will buy less gas
and that means less pollution.
because they are old and weak and that makes

them dangerous.
second-hand smoke causes cancer.
According to one study, some whales have an

I.Q. of
over 120.
39
Case Study
We have learned that good debate requires strong reasons. These reasons must have a
'. P O i S P . y 1
40
`
solid foundation of evidence to support them. Strong evidence supports the reasons, which in turn support an opinion. Finding evidence to support your reasons often requires researching a variety of sources, including newspapers, magazines, books, journals, and the internet. The supports on the next four pages are al- on the topic of
capital punishment, the death penalty for major crimes.
Have you ever thought about capital punishment? Discuss these questions: Does your country have capital punishment? For what crimes? Which countries have capital punishment? Which countries don't? In what ways are people sentenced to capital punishment executed? Do you agree with capital punishment? Are you for or against it?
Read the sources below. Mark which sources are for the death penalty, and which
sources are against it.
`
fessor To ru Machigai of the University of Fcording towe a 1990 study by Pro ital crimes in the United States of
! Hawaii, 67 peoplenvlct a were actually innocent.

America between 1 UU anu ''ou
_.
Against
/
\\
Wh ffek-41ca"J
cI
'e-c
u- y-? fl' e Y c Q
ov- rioKG
cc frii ov1-
rlo ya
For
Against
I U 3.
There's a claim that it is more expensive for the state to execute a criminal than to imprison him for life. That is not entirely true. It is very expensive to hold someone in prison for life. Life prisoners stay in prison on average for 30 to 40 years at a cost of $40,000 to $50,000 per year. (Journal of Prison Reform, January, 2000) For
5 y. ' 1 O . 1 1
Against
V,itr 1't
rri o 7--f1ofr1,
Ao - i" t?-r-fo1;( -w,v&
piichnifrrt- doec Y1O 0 T
!'
For Against

r 4r
hltp://www. Iiveandletlive.com
IVOr f
rord
C
Refresh
F averages a nd Istlive cam
O Q Histor Searth
Print
HateFu1l
Larger LA
Smaller sA
, , ;7
Address:
is convicted of
Don't kill the innocent. Are we really sure when someone
crime?
s o t erC V Ho d e l
Three hundred and fifty people convicted of capital crimes in the U.S.A. between 1900 and 1986 were innocent of the crimes charged, according to a 1995 study. Some prisoners escaped execution by minutes, but 67 innocent people were actually
executed.
(Amnesty International -- Report ACT5OIO9/98, April, 1995)
Chat '511th Others
For Against
murdered another man. He was sent to prison for 22 In 1934, a man named Leroy Keith he went on a killing spree murdering three more years, then released. Eight months later people. es, Spring, 1997)
For Against
41
/ * " ,
'"
The State of Utah brought back capital punishment in January, 1977 because in 1976, Utah had 55 murders; in 1977, there were only 44 murders, a 20%
decrease.
S. PP* . g iy ' O
For Against
// (
'
AKQ L-o cic-
v-at
&Hn idcot
I-vc.
0 c--c 1 cHizc-fr1c hV L'ec-vi cr-c
0.
l_
rO Hi st or tt ,
/.,
-'-'. ,
For Against
C
http:f/www.Iiveandletfive.com
i
-
r m a
f0r1
A 1998 study by the New York State Defenders Association showed that the cost of
a trial seeking capital punishment is more than double the cost of a trial seeking life imprisonment.
A recent case for murder cost the State of New York $2.1 million dollars. The cost
Pa ge = o .r
of the trial, if it had been seeking life in prison rather than the death penalty, was estimated to be less than $1 million dollars.
Chat VI Slicers
T frwrl r 0
Ch
Astof 11
srgor Seller Print H Preferences -
AT r
42
http;//wc.lvec!etIve.cocc
.....
For
Against
1lurcIc4c J Isicd zX ah af'tcr 1'

Mai. 'c9
f SH c4u;d of vcAc-c (JU-r c9iari.i Irviore- ;" 977.
For Against
-,
S. PP. 1 P O i.i . . 3 .. '
The state of Florida estimated that an execution costs the state $3.2 million
dollars while life imprisonment costs approximately $500,000.
(The Orlando Press, April 1st, 1999)
For Against
In Japan, some experts estimate that up to 10% of people executed since 1945 were innocent. Moreover, the number of innocent people convicted of non-capital crimes is
thought to be even higher. (NKK television news special, June, 1995)

,,\67___ _ \__ _
. _
For Against
` ---4--
*'
','.6
,;,
/0 7c y 1'95, Mnt-j K0'v pfr-/cone-r-c Ke- K/ 7L/7L con'ie- I/110-eM pe kv/// be- e-xe-e-Ufe-
,,,,',
-----
''''.,*,
6'
For Against
Cl
April Ii, l
Professor discusses crime with university 'aw students

At today's 1998 Law Review forum, Professor Stephen Layson of USNC said that each execution of a murderer prevents 18 other murders. He showed that if we increase executions by I%, we prevent approximately 105 future
murders,
KOE
ducte
into a
For Against
s.awa
43
mit rTrn
Case Study
From the sources on the previous pages, fi
S3 . PP* n . i 0.'Pi. i = . O
44
in the chart below. The reasons have already
been filled in for you. Except for famous quotations, don't copy word for word from the
sources. Rewrite the supports in your own words.
Opinion Capital Punishment should Abolished.

Reason i Pc-ii P-iaI ic xpc-cvrO ku (4C-CArhoul c-oc+c 5.2. ryuillioui dollavc1 ' m"
Supports and Sources
" rkouriic.u+ c fc.uc.c. (OrIaucJo frc.cc
(O
Reason 2 r Supports and Sources
D/
/.` / L
Reason 3 M;ctc-c ruack.
Z O ,
. y 1 1 . . 3
Now, think about the other side of the issue. Review the sources, and write reasons 2 and 3. Then, find supports for al- 3 reasons.
S. P
Opinion Capital Punishment should be Retained.

Reason 1 1}ic di

(a) (ii 9
p1 h 9
iurdc.rc d -rcacccJ 2.0%

c-c.u+cc1.
.ar
af+r &larI1 (ifor s'ac
L/-ai ta-ic i Jovrpia(M O
'
(O
Reason 2
Reason 3
45
Researching Supports
0 For this project you will need to choose one set of opposite opinions. For example: The government should lower taxes. / The government should raise taxes.
or
i ' P O 5 P . 1 .
Eating meat is healthy. / Eating meat is not healthy.

or
English is more useful than math. / Math is more useful than English.
or Think of your own pair of opposite opinions.
0 Next, go to the library, and research your opinion. You may

look in magazines, newspapers,
0.
LIBRjy
books, on the internet, and so on. You may also want to interview experts on the topic.
Find at least 3 different reasons
46
for each side of the opinion. If it

seems difficult to find reasons,
it may be that your topic is too

vague or too one-sided. If so,
rl
H ( O
you should choose a new set of

opinions. For each reason, you should find at least two pieces
e
ED
nZ
of evidence to support the ; reason. You should try to have many different sources.
O When you have finished your research, write Reason-Support sheets like the ones you wrote in the
previous exercise on Capital Punishment.
"
;1 -I .1 1AI I -1 -Ii l]
You must include your sources. If your source of evidence is a book, newspaper, or magazine, you should include the title, date, author, and author's credentials. If your source of evidence is an interview, remember to include the person's name, credentials,
and the date of the interview.
e -a II
,i,I SM
n'
Macro Organizat Ion
for the AC
The first speech in a debate is called the First Affirmative Constructive speech, or the
1AC. It is called a constructive speech because it begins construction of the affirmative case/house. The 1 AC has 3 parts: The Introduction, to introduce your opinion to the
. ` O O 2 1 1 y P
udges and the audience, the Affirmative Points, to give your reasons and supports, and
the Conclusion, to finish your speech. Look at the speech below and match the labels on the left with the speech parts on the
right.

50
Introduction
Our third point is simplicity. Soccer is much easier than baseball. Baseball rules
take hours to explain, and you need a bat, glove, and baseball diamond to play. Soccer rules are easy and all you nee d is
a soccer ball and a field.
0.
Point 1
Our first point is cost. Soccer tickets are
er than baseball tickets. In
this city, the price of a ticket to a baseball game is about three times hipher thin rhP price of a ticket to a soccer game.
Point 2
Thank you, Ladies and entle en. Today, we are debating the resolution, "Soccer is better than baseball." We, on
the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have four reasons: cost, excitement, simplicity, and color.
Point 3
Our second point is excitement. Soccer is

much more exciting than baseball. In baseball, 90% of the time the players are just standing around waiting. Soccer has
iction all the time.
We have talked about cost, excitement

simplicity, and color. We have shown that
Point 4
soccer is a much better sport than

propose.
baseball. For these reasons, we beg to
Conclusion
Our fourth point is color. Soccer
uniforms are much more colorful than baseball uniforms. The New York Yankees, for example, have one of the
most boring uniforms in the world.
Micro Organizat Ion for the 1AC r

Each Point has 3 parts: the Signpost, the Reason and the Supports. You can have as many supports for a point as you like. Look at this diagram.
In the Macro section, you learned that the first speech in a debate has 3 parts: The Introduction, the Affirmative Points, and the Conci usion. Usually, you wi" have 3 or 4 points in the first speech of a debate. Let's look closer at one affirmative point.
' O y
Introduction
-
Point `
Point `
1. Signpost: Our first point is cost.
Look at the first point. We have underlined the Signpost, drawn a box around the Reason
and circled the Supports.

ir first Doint is price or a ticket to a baseba soccer game.
Look at the first point. We have underlined the Signpost, drawn a box around the Reason and circled the Supports. Our second point is excitement. Soccer is much more exciting than baseball. In baseball, 90% of the time the players are just standing around waiting. Soccer has action all the time.
Our third point is simplicity. Soccer is much easier to understand and play than baseball. Baseball rules take hours to explain, and yo u need a bat, glove, and baseball diamond to play. Soccer rules are easy and all you need is a soccer ball and a field. Our fourth point is color. Soccer uniforms are much more colorful than baseball uniforms.
The New York Yankees, for example, have one of the most boring uniforms in the world.
w o w e i e n. P
-
2. Reason: Soccer tickets are much cheaper...

3. Support I: A ticket to a baseball game costs... 4. Support...
0. P O i
Point 4
5.Support...
Conclusion
n t ity, th game is aDOut three times higher than the price of aT ket to
cneape
tickets
51
Debate Introduct Ions

The introduction in a first affirmative constructive speech, the 1AC, has a simple structure.
Unl t 4-
INTRODUCTION FORMAT
nizin or g your o in o i n
52
Listen and fill in the words.
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. We are debating the resolution

support this resolution. WTe have
. We, on the affirmative team, strongly reasons:
and
PAIRWORK Practice
giving constructive speech introductions. Partner A is the speaker
and uses the page on the right. Partner B is the judge and uses page 54. Using the format
above, the speaker greets the audience,
states the resolution, and outlines the affirmative
resolution ndtthe noin onn points while the judge listens and writes the res _.ut.o. a -nd ._ a {-firma+ive rmat.ve po.nts .. -. e clipboard as in the example below. For introductions 1 and 2, Partner A is the speaker
and Partner B is the udge. Switch roles for introductions 3 and 4.
Today's Debate "Soccer is better than baseball."

COSt
and Gentlemen. w
Thank you, Ladies
are debating the

resolution, "Soccer is better than baseball.'' , on the affirmative team, strongly support this resolution. ,V' have 4 reasons: cost, excitement,
excitement
simplicity
color
simplicity, and color.
n"nt`:
----,
/,)
' P O in I O 1
O t
y's oe e
mistakes respect for life ha bilitation
Today's Debate
"Smoking should be
"Capital punishment should be ab ished."
banned."
health
hospital costs pution ugly brown teeth
O L , l"\
0,
a rtne r tJudge
r

Partner B Judcie
O ' P O 0. y
.
54
er B Speaker Today's Debate

be retained." cost
Today's Debate
"Capital punishment should
"Smoking should be allowed."
smokers' rights
rrence
tax
money
victims rights
Debate Conclus ions

The conclusion in a first affirmative constructive speech also has a simple structure.
'OP O . y U
INTRODUCTION FORMAT
Listen and fill in the missing words.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have talked about

and
. For these reasons we beg to propose.
and have clearly shown that
This is a general format to conclude a debate speech. In the first blanks, you give your signposts. In the second blank, you repeat the resolution. Finally, you state that for these reasons you support the resolution.
PAIR
Introauction tormat and the conclusion format you have learned in the exercises below.
ORK Now it is. time for you to take a turn behind the podium. Use the
B.
0.
Partner ^
Make an introduction for this resolution:
Make a conclusion
this resolution:
for
Today's debate "A small company is better to work for than lar ge company"
' opportun 'ty
salary flexibility
Partner B
Make an introduction for this resolution:
Partner ^
Make a conclusion for this resolution:
Today's debate
"Homework should be
ab ished"
free time
dating sleep
55
=jjJ. m
Strip Speech
PART
Form smal- groups, and read the speech on the next page. The speech has
' P O i. i O 9 ' 1 y
56
been cut into pieces and mixed up. Put the speech letter of the piece in the space provided. Three of the pieces have been done for you.
back into the correct order. Write the
0.00000.0 0
.'*.
Stl
2a
. .....
.... .'..
....'
",;,..."'''
Support la lb Signpost 2
2
,,['[[:'.
'''''
-__Conclusion
''''''''''''''
PART 2 Form a new group. This time, the teacher will give each student one or more pieces of a new strip speech from page 125 in the back of this book. This time READ your
pieces to your group; you must not show the pieces to your group members. Put the speech back into the correct order. Write the letter of the piece in the space provided. The
first piece has been done for you. 1
Su
Signpost 1
I
''''"
Support la -J'''''''' Support lb
3b-
Su
3c
. '..
;l lr
=r ' i a ;;'
0. . . .
C. Our second point is hospital costs. D. This is a big problem on train platforms, where many people ignore the no smoking signs and blow smoke in your face. We should ban cigarettes to get rid of this problem. [. According to the American Cancer Society, every cigarette you smoke shortens your life by approximately 7 minutes. ank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today the resolution is, "Smoking should be banned. " G. This is because smokers get cancer and other diseases more than non-smokers. S miss more work, and spend more time in the hospital. H. We have talked about health, hospital costs and pollution. We have shown clearly that cigarettes should be banned. We beg to propose. I. We, on the affirmative team, strongly support this resolution. We have 3 reasons: health hospital costs, and pollution.
O O l.9 0.`
Cigarettes fill your lungs with poisonous chemicals, causing cancer and lung disease. ,,.
.'.".
,./
.*.,,..'.
,,'',,'.
K. Smokers cost the country a lot of money.

'',.,'6'`'.'..'.`''.H j *.
1. Also, according to the Ministry of Health, the average smoker requires over $200,000 in hospital costs over the course of their lives. The total bill for the country is over $50,000,000 a year.
'.
..,...
,.
M. Furthermore, this has directly affected my life. My grandfather died of lung cancer two years ago. It was a long illness, and it caused my family much stress and sadness.
,,. .*.,,..,.,,,,
N. This is because when people smoke, they blow many poisonous gases into the air.
'.'./ :.rH( " 4/1 - * _4 ___
0. Our third point is pollution.
57
Present your House

PAIRWORK in Units 1, 2, and 3 we learned how to construct a house or a debate
case. In this unit we have already learned how to present the finished house. Now, it is
time to practice both constructing and presenting a debate case.
Find a partner. Decide who will be PARTNER A, and who will be PARTNER B.
O.
n Think of a resolution. If you can't think of a good resolution, look at page 123.
E Think of reasons and supports to

hold up the roof of your house. PARTNER A completes construction of the upper house on the next page by writing the resolution on the roof, the reasons on the pillars, and the uses the lower house to do the same.
supports on the foundation. PARTNER B
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution ...
Fl 1 IdI PARTNER A presents first. Use the Macro and Micro structures we have learned in this unit. Be sure to use the Introduction and Conclusion formats we have studied.
/ 1 1
PARTNER B listens to A's case and

fills in the roof, pillars and supports of A's house. Then, B presents while A listens and fills in B's house.
58
' P O O '9 y .
Partner B
Partner ^
Î B
O
Construct A Case Listen And Fill In
0.
Construct A Case Listen And Fill In
O OO 0
59
Letter to the Editor

Newspapers don't just give the news! The letters to the editor section allows readers to exchange opinions.
i.gy
' P O i.i
60
Read Naomi Park's letter to the editor and answer the questions below.
1.What is Naomi's opinion? 2. How many reasons does

Naomi have?
StopThe Highway Dear Editor,
4. What are her suDoorts?

5. Do you ever read lette
3. What are her signposts?
to the editor?
6. Have you ever written
a letter to the editor?

On what topic?
Sincerejy ,
Noni' Pk
Write a letter to the editor giving your opinion on the topic of your choice. Use the organization we have studied in this unit.
nm
b
[
l r ;T l I
IJ
U e e U
HJ
j f. I rc . :it.c. h . JZ
l1 1
C
. 5 ".*.*1
TF _ ` yr '` '_
r i L
'1_.
Refuting Opinions
There are two sides to every story. For every opinion, there is an opposite opinion. For every reason to believe in an opinion, there is also a reason not to believe in it. To really understand an opinion or an issue, it is not enough to see it from ust one point of view. True
understanding of an issue means to think about the opinion and reasons from both points of view. Let's try that.
Below are the cat team's reasons why cats make better pets than dogs. Can you find an opposing reason from the next page?
P 1 5
62
= TT
5 l 27
, z ^2:
,Z smarter
)0 Cats are
than dogs.
- Q Cats are cheaper

than dogs. A cat
costs $200 dollars; a dog

costs $400.
S25/month d o. S27/month
n
Cats are cheaper to feed than dogs. A cat costs $25 dollars a month, a dog costs $27 a month.
J 1:
J
n:
'' m ,\`b
0 Cats are cuter than dogs.
' /
7O Cats are clean;

dogs are very dirty.
r
/ X ' `
l l.
0 Cats were the

TThst popular pet in
ancient Egypt.
$27 - $25 = $2
Who Cares?
difference! Two dollars a month is not a significant

of money!
That is not a significant

Y
0 5 . ". . * . 1
iii
, am
G
That's not always true! some aog5 sucn as cocker spaniels, are very cute, while some cats are
1I mean and ugly.
the next page.
mrlmnn
Stating why something is not so is called a refutation. The dog team refuted the cat team in six different ways. What kinds of refutations did they use? The answer is on
` '' l a .. lr e
That's not true. Dogs are smarter cats. They can tricks.
' Ll f
111 l
That's easy to solve.

Give your dog a bath!
That's not relevant!

Ancient Egyptian
history is not relevant for choosing a pet today!
a]
M1
ofl
o That is not flecess fri P! ,/^,_ _

necessarily
puppies for free!
63
Refuting an Opinion
Refutation, which means to negate or deny something, is used in debate to tel- why the
opposing team's point is either not true or not important. More specifically, a point can be
=S ". . * . n i . 5 P E O
refuted by saying that it is not true, or that it is not always true, which means that there are
some important exceptions. Or we can say it is not necessarily true, which means that there
is some doubt about the supporting evidence. If a point is not important, it may be
40% True
True 6ut NotImportant
Read the following affirmative reasons and the negative's line of thought. Check the boxes that best complete the refutation.
Cats are better pets than dogs.
Cats are better
Negat ve thinks $5 is a very small amount of

So this is:
money.
pets than. dogs, because a cat costs 1uu wnlle a aog costs IU
Cats are better
pets than dogs because cats are
smarter than dogs.
O
([
Cats are better
than dogs.
pets than dogs because cats are
Cats were the
ost popular pet in ancient Egypt

-
Not True
Not Important
D og Negative thinks Dogs are smarter than cats. cats. t. can learn to do tricks, cats can't.
So this is:
Negat ive thinks Some dogs are very cute while

So this is:
some cats are mean and ugly.
Not True Not Important
cu
.
Negat ive thinks Egyptian history has nothing to do with choosing a pet.
So this is:
Not True
Not Important
Cats are better
Negative thinks
So this is:
You can easily give your dog a
pets than dogs because dogs are very dirty.
bath.
Negative thinks
There is no proof that cats have
0
64
pets than dogs because cats have
nine lives.
Not True
lives.
So this is:
Not Important
unimportant because it has nothing to do with the resolution and is thus not relevant, or it
".* .. x ' E . 5
may be a very smal numerical difference and is thus not significant, or finally, it may be a
problem that has a simple solution and is thus easy to solve.
Not True
Not Always True

Not Necessari True Not Relevant
Not S ig ficant
0.5
Easy to Solve
Negative says This is
Not Truc not always true not necessari true
not relevant not significant easy to solve
amount of money.
because $5 is a very small
Negat uve
says
This is
Not True
not necessarily true
not always true
not relevant
not significant easy to solve
because dogs are smarter than cats. Dogs can learn to do tricks, cats can't. because some dogs, such as cocker spaniels, are very cute
while some cats are mean
Negative says
This is
Not True

not always true not necessarily true
not relevant
and ugly. because Egyptian history has nothing to do with choosing a pet.
because you can easily give
Negative says
This is
Not True not relevant
not necessarily true easy to solve

Negative says
This is
not always true not significant
Not True
not always true
not relevant

not necessarily true

Negative says
This is
your dog a bath.
Not True

not always true not necessarily true
not relevant not significant
easy to solve
because there is no proof that cats have nine lives.
65
First, study the two language files below for making refutations based on Not True and Not Important. (Note that the file on Not Important contains three smaller files: Not Significant,
Not Relevant, and Easy to Solve.) Then, study the pattern for stating a refutation on page 67, paying careful attention to the example. Finally, use the steps to make a refutation of
your own.
Types of Ref utat Ions

ly rue.
Not Tr eTh t's n
ot tru .That's
untru .That'
s fals .Th t's no alwa
ys tru .Th t's not nec ssari
kI.4 c:...:g:......%e
'
"' ' ,--.'-.---:.--- :[l:-
That's not important because the difference is not significant. That's not important because the difference doesn't matter.
Not Relevant
That's not important because there is so little difference between...
That's not important_because the difference is too small. <, ..,..-. ,- -I .

N_____________________________ _
Easy Solve ,
-
" .-'
66
0.5 f.. i . 5 . P
Stat nga
` 2 SIGNPOST
Ref utat Ion

" . 5
On the previous page you studied what to say. Now, let's study how to say it. There are five steps in stating a refutation for an opinion. They are as follows:
. .
Their first point was...
They talked about... They mentioned...
Their rst point s care.
REPH ASE
They said that... The other team said... Our worthy opponents claimed...
They said that cats

require less care.
3. NEGATION
This is not true! That point is totally untrue! Even if that were true, it is not important! That is not important! That point is clearly unimportant!
That is not important!
4. WHY
It can't be true that... It is not always true that... It is not necessarily true that... The whole point about... is not relevant... This whole point is not significant. Everything they said about this point can be easily solved. Their example is not relevant to the point. The statistic they gave is not significant. e statistic they gave is not necessarily true. e problem mentioned by their expert is easily solved. e explanation they gave was not relevant.
h h ln
The whole point about care is not relevant to owning a pet.
(Note: The Negation and Why sentences are

often combined into
one sentence.
For example: That is

not important because the whole point about care is not relevant to
5. RATIONALE
Sometimes it is also true that... There is no connection between... The difference is too small to be important. The reason that... Just because X is true does not necessarily mean liiit Y ;c l cr, triir
To solve it, do X instead of Y!
T TT
owning a pet.)
The reason that we have a pet is to enjoy

takin g
care of it!
67
r J-;r7 L-' ' ` I , ' 'l l . `r.i ".
Point Ref utat ion

the room and read their cards to the students with REFUTATION CARDS. If the cards form not have a clear an opinion POINT-REFUTATION relationship, say Match! If the cards do many matching opinion POINT-REFUTATION relationship, say No match! Keep track of how cards you find. Continue unti- you talk to everyone. How many matches could you find? One? Two? None?
Your teacher wi give you either an opinion POINT CARD or a REFUTATION CARD from the back of this book. As shown on the next page, students with P NT CARDS move around
. 5
. 1 5 1
68
Look at the following two examples.
cards form a POINT-REFUTATION relationship.

o These '!?[ W1 two
POINT CARD
People should he allowed to have guns. If people have guns, they
That's not always uILi.t.?_1:__I true. Many gun owners
don't know how to use guns, so they

themselves, they shoot themselves!
can protect themselves.
often have accidents. ey don't protect
cards do not form

o These two
POINT-REFUTATION relationship.
P NT CARD
That's not true. Human rights
Nuclear weapons should be include things like freedom of speech. Human rights don't include
abolished. They are very expensive.
the right to have guns!
rOINr-KpfLirk-r:oN
nNP ri-1p nprLIT-AT-ipN Kp ITtAr rDMS ITt 6pSTee=
MAll Lt WITTt T-frtp OFtNIpN
. 5
Fp!N AKm
" . . * * 1 P
Qk
bude-,
B h .
Match
h h 4 C Q Q h
, h
:.T !'! n.ri I L , ' , . 1 . . .
Tr ' . . 1 ` ` '-
Making Refutat ions

With a partner, read these four affirmative points and write a refutation. The resolution is:
".*..1 . 5
10.5
"There should be no school on Saturdays." If you need help, the people below can give
you hints.
0 Our first point is family. If students don't have school, they will spend more time with their families.
OOur seco nd poi nt is cost. If
-/,,.
schools are c losed on Saturday, the schools w 11 save much money

on heating, electricity, and teachers'
salaries.
Our third point is free time. If there is no school on Saturday,
students will have more free time to enjoy their hobbies and interests.
Our fourth point is lesson re aration. If teachers don't have to teach on Saturday, they
will use the time to study or prepare
lessons or make tests, etc.
,s H o w d o t u d e n t s s pe n d their f r e e t im e n o w?
r Whatcould
students do other than spend time with their families?
How much
money does it cost to heat a school oii Saturday?
00 0
Listen and Write
Listen and take notes on the affirmative speech, "It is better to be married than single." Write your refutation for each point in the space on the right.
. 5
" . E 5
A f fi r'
eeCL/,
ef tat jon
;, m i
,/,,,//
_--
__ _/,,-,/,,.--,,
71
Tennis Debate
We have studied both the affirmative and the negative sides and are now ready to have our first debate! This is a very simple debate game called Tennis Debate.
0.5 " .*.. 1 P E .
Make teams of 2 or 3 people. Half of the teams will be Affirmative Teams and half of the
teams will be Negative Teams.
1. A resolution*
minutes to brain
IJk /!U7
and make reasons and supports in favor of the resolution. The Affirmative team writes their reasons and supports, then passes them to the Negative team. The Negative team has 3 minutes to think about possible refutations to the Affirmative
team's points. by reading its first reason and support. The Negative team volleys by giving its refutation. The Affirmative team must then respond to the Negative team's refutation. The debate continues back and forth until one side can not respond. The last team to give a response is the winner.
The Tenl Tennis Debate begins. The teams face each other. The Affirmative team serves
is given to the Affirmative team. The Affirmative team has 3
mr
In this round, the negative team

not pass
is
challenged to think on its feet. First, the Affirmative team
brainstorms reasons and supports in favor of the resolution and writes them down, but does
t1 ni its first reason and them to the Negative team. Then, the Affirmative support. The Negative team listens, and without prior preparation must quickly volley back a
refutation. Again, the last team to respond wins.
`71
In this round, both teams must think on their feet. First, the Affirmative team receives a resolution and, without preparation, must immediatel y serve a reason to the negative. The negative must return a refutation. The last team to answer wins.
*The resolutions for this game may be provided by your teacher, or as an easy warm up you might use the resolutions you have already brainstormed on page 29, or you might book. choose from
the resolutions listed on pages 123 and 124 in the back of this
72
Tennis Debate
U . 5" .*.
Res ution:
Cats re better pets than dogs.

Negat .ve Team
That's not true. Cats are
noisy, especially at night.
1 1
P 5
Affirmative Team
Cats are better than dogs because cats

are quiet.
1 1
That is easily solved. You can teach dogs to be quiet, but cats are difficult to teach.
>
That's not always
true. Some cats may

be noisy but almost all dogs are noisy.
U U
Critiquing n Editori
Naomi Park's letter about Highway 26 got printed in a magazine! However, someone
. 5
0
disagrees with her opinion. Why? Read the ref utations written next to the letter.
2. Not Significant. 1. Not Necessarily True. Road repairs cost nearly $40
million dollars a year. Where

did she get these numbers?
The total government transportation budget is over $500 million. $31 million is not a lot of money for
the government.
. p
74
1///V,`* `'
r
4. Not Necessari True.
It depends on the
h
L l.rt n
StoD The Hiahwa

3. Not Relevant.
kind of buses.
Some buses are
Our roads are in
good condition. Why

do we need extra
rn Netes,
I'm writing about the government's plan for the new Highway Number 26. 1 have two reasons to oppose this plan for a new highway. My reasons are the cost
and the environment.
O]
repairs? '
seen,
i)
more expensive than this.

5. Not Relevant.
Not very' many
'4 2
Concerning the cost, the planned highway is just too expensive. For the same million dollars we could renair all of the roads in the city and have enough money left tobu v 20 new buses. To use the money on just one road is a waste. As for the environment, the planned highway will run through what is now a beautiful forest and some xcellent farmland. This forest is the home tothe a bird which is endangered and s our protection. We should not destroy the environment to build an unnecessary highway. Because of the cost and the environment, I urge everyone to oppose the government's plan for Highway Number 26. Naomi Park
people ride the

buses we have
-
flow; most people

drive.
s e b ' n v r t 1 a ! t ~ h
a r C ns )n i e I k b r l r s O a e S a n B n u a e P i yg Ell g C :dS
R e o l b , b A
resu
n .L ` O b
a L a
The highway will not destroy that much forest or

farmland.
6. Not Significant.
7. Not Relevant.
'
The highway will not disturb the spotted owl's life and there are other forests where it lives.
Find a letter to the editor, or an editorial in an English magazine or newspaper. Find the
most important points, and write possible refutations.

HU n"u HU,
0O

C 1
S. PP .5
76
'
Challenging Supports
0000000
00000
In this unit we will practice challenging supports by asking questions and testing evidence.
Look at the claims this television spokesperson for the Super Springo Healthasizer company
makes for the SSH health system. Check whether you believe or doubt each support he gives.
No more dieting! With the SSH system you can eat anything you want, as much as you want.
recent studies show that there is no connection between eating and health. Experts have proven that only
rhythmic wrist movement from using the SSH can build a healthy body.
I BELIEVE THAT!
0 00 0
Super Springo Hecilthcisizer

0000
0 0
000
00000
, \/- 0
, 0
C
Z k0
_ ' 10
7/

0 0 0
0
n C
The SSH system works. SSH improves health!
SPORn7L1
Aprilgg
Soper Spring0 REVi[WFb
INS,o HeaItp. 'Zo-
An article in the April, 1999 Issue of Sporty Lite magazine said that SSH improves health
I DOUBT THAT!
I BELIEVE THAT!
I DOUBT THAT!
The SSH system is recommended by medical professionals as a method for reducing high blood pressure.
Everyone loves the SSH system!
Rhythmic Wrist Movement and regular cigarette smoking
reduce blood pressure and improve health. (journal of Sports Medicine, May 12, 1919)
I BELIEVE THAT!
O
According to the famous actress Maryland Munro, the SSH builds strong bodies in twelve ways by increasing the level of protein in the blood.
BELIEVE THAT!
evidence.
S.PP s * . C. 1
lO
p p
Z "
X 7,'
p O O
100% of the people asked agreed that the SSH is the

greatest.
I DOUBT THAT!
I BELIEVE THAT!
I DOUBT THAT!
Increase blood protein levels with the fantastic SSH system!
SSH works because it is the only system that uses the patented RWM method.
Marcus Wellbeing, president of SSH products, has said that the SSH machine is the only way to build a healthy body because no other product uses the patented RWM
Di
method.
I DOUBT THAT!
I BELIEVE THAT!
I DOUBT THAT!
Did you believe all of the salesman's claims? Which ones did you doubt? In debate, it is necessary to challenge the validity or truth of every support and every piece of
77

.. '
n'
0
Is there a source given for the evidence?
Testing Supports
All supports are in doubt until proven. Just because the other team offers evidence as support does not mean that the evidence is valid or that the support is necessarily true. We doubt or test the evidence given in supports by asking questions about the source of the evidence.
.. . s . PP 5 . c
78
The evidence is not necessarily true if the source of the evidence is not
given and we cannot test whether the evidence is valid or true.
Does the source explain its claims satisfactorily?
The evidence is not necessarily true if the support just states that something is true or is good without explaining how or why.
Is there a date on the source?

The evidence is not necessarily true if there is no date on the source or if the source is old because the information may be out of date and no
longer valid or true.
If the support is a statistic, is the statistic valid?
The evidence is not necessarily true if there was not enough data collected or if the collection method is in doubt.
Is the source of the support an expert in the field?
The evidence is not necessarily true if the source of the evidence is not an expert or does not have satisfactory knowledge of the field.
Is the source biased?
The evidence is not not necessarily true if the source is biased, meaning that the person, company, or other source of information would have a
reason to make a false claim or would profit from giving false evidence.
If the answer is not satisfactory then proceed to refutation of that support.
Asking Questions
Most debates have a question and answer session between speeches where the debaters can
question the other team. Here are six files for questioning supports.
. 5 . 6 C1 . P S
0 If there is no source
What is the source for that information?
Where did that information come from?

Is there a source for that information?
O If there is no explanation given What is the reason for the source's conclusion that . . .
Why does the source believe this?
O If there is no
date given
What is the date for that source? How recent is that source?

0 If the statistic is questionable What method was used to collect this data?
Was enough data collected?
0 If the source's expertise is questionable
Does the source have enough experience to be called an "expert" in this area?
What is the source's experience in this area?

,.'
0 If the source might be biased
Does the source benefit financially if people believe this information? Isn't that source biased?
79
S. pP r.s C n i
82
PAIRWORK Partner B looks at this page, Partner A looks at the previous page. Partner A starts by reading one of the supports against nuclear power. Partner B listens and chooses the best question for challenging the support. Partner B then reads the question while Partner A checks to see if it is correct. Continue unti- all six supports have been
correctly questioned, then switch roles.
Questions
What is the date for that source?
Was enough data collected? How mans people did you ask?
Does the source have enough knowledge about nuclear power to be called an expert?
What is the reason for the source's conclusion that nuclear power is dangerous?
What is the source for that information?
Isn't that source biased?
a. nst Abortion 0 Supports A

H
According to The Phizzer Drug Company, abortion should be banned because there are much better methods of birth control available.
Ars Bks?
Medical Society, wrote that "Abortion

is murder...." (1997).
Ans Rprison2
Dr. Shin, Director of the American
According to Professor Pat Thanaton, "Abortion should be banned because a child inside the mother can feel pain. Abortion is murder." (The New Times, January 25, 1999) Ans: Expert?
L I According to Ih
ournal of the American Mkinc an Psychology So Y, abortion is dangerous for the mother and often results in her death.
Ans DcrtrP
Challenges Supporis
PART ` A debater is provinq the resolution: "Cats are better Dets than doas."
en i n Un t i 6. ahll
\4/ Her tirst p nt is that cats are cheaper than dogs. She has six supports, but each support has a problem. Listen and match each support with its problem. The first one is
done for you.
i'
Support 1 !
No Source Given
Support 2
Support 3
Support 4
[T
LNo Explanation Giv No Date Given
Por s . Su
O
O
O O
Support 5
e Statistic Is
Question a e
Th e Source's Expertise Is Questionable

The Source is Biased
Support 6
&
PART 2 Now, listen again. Stop after each support and practice refuting the
support. Use the five-step sequence you have learned. The first one is done for
SIGNPOST
Their first point was cost.

RE PH RASE
They claimed that the May 1999 issue of al Weekly stated that cats are less expensive.
NEGATION & WHY

But this is not necessarily true! The evidence they gave was very questionable.
RATIONALE
They gave no explanation for why cats are cheaper!

83
Question & Refute

S. PP s * a 1
84
PAIRWORK The man below is trying to prove the resolution "Birds make better pets than cats. Partner A looks at these two pages. Partner B looks at pages 86 and 87. Partner A starts.
0 Reason Our first point is cost. Birds
' America's foremost
authority on pets"
Average Cost of Feeding a
Pet
make better pets than cats because they are cheaper. According to Pet Lover Magazine the cost of feeding a bird is much,
much lower than
Catfood . . . . . $1.30
Dogfood. . . . . $1.80
Fishfood. . . . $1.00 Bird Feed. . . , $.25

Mansfield
the cost of feeding

other common
ists the move is pos-"nroves the overall
pets, including
cats.
0 Reason My second point is safety.

Birds are better pets than cats because they
:o rTL17'LTflflTflnmm
NEW YORK (AP) Heavyweight boxer Charles "Killer" Lubetsky said in a prefight interview that he hated all animals and has never had a pet in his life. But if he had a pet, he would have a bird. When asked why he would choose a bird over other pets. Lubetsky replied that "birds are safe." He said he is afraid of dogs because they bite and of cats because they scratch. "Birds are safe for adults and
children," he said
-I
'.1 1,l' -J fll '1 1
are safer. Dogs bite and cats scratch,

therefore birds are safer for both adults and children
according to a recent lntervlew Sta* Sou

with Mr. Charles
Lubetsky.
Dr. Doj;,_
deveJOpm
Ssor of_Child
<
O Reason Our third point is child
"As senior professor of child
development at the University

of London, I have always said that birds are the best pet for families with children under 12 months. The singing and
chirping of birds help develop

in children an appreciation of song and music."
Dr. Dolittle's book,
Child Rearinq, published J y 1894
development. Birds are better pets than cats because they benefit young children. In his book, Child Dr. Dolittle says that birds help children develop an appreciation for
song and music.

rl el elll '-
Read al- six reasons and supports to Partner B. - Then, Partner B wil-
question the supports. Try to answer Partner B's questions by using the sources to the left
.5 C.in . P S U n
of the man. If you can't answer a question, say "Sorry, I don't know." - Then, Partner B wi-- try to refute your source.
light of the fact thrhse o
Smart Birds, Dumb Dogs
Reason My fourth point is intelligence.
0h
A wc
Birds are better pets than cats because birds are more intelligent. Recently, experts say
that birds such as parakeets and
canaries are
t hani
r. U. Wing, the famous

expert on pets, believes
that birds, such as parakeets

and canaries, are smarter than
dogs and cats. Moreover, birds are cheaper and better for children.
Zoology Today
and it half of I ates (56

Last 999
actually smarter than dogs or cats.
Octoher
V
V
VU
point is runaways. Birds make better pets than cats because birds never run away. Cats often run away from their owners; birds do not! Birds are confined in cages; cats are
O Reason Our next
not.
0 Reason Our team's final point is
C
(-a-I-c ave- JI avicJ have- f(eac.
(-a-I-c c4z. aicI ti-ivovv up all oVe-v 1-ie- houce-. 11v-cJc aye- le-au fu(
afrlcJ c-(e-akl.
mI
cleanliness. Birds are better pets than cats

because they are cleaner. I have seen it
written
that cats are dirty animals
that have fleas,
VcI
v-ve-v- rvaI-e a
while birds are beautiful and clean and never make a mess.
85
\ Testing Supports
PAIRWORK Partner B looks at these two pages. Partner A looks at pages 84 and 85. Partner A starts.
9 . 1 S. pP s * . 6 -.
86
As Partner A reads the six reasons and supports, take notes below.
Proposition "Birds make better pets than cats."

Signpost 1
Reason
Support
Signpost 2
Reason
Support
Signpost 3
Reason
Support
Signpost 4
Reason
Support
Signpost 5 Reason
Support
Signpost 6
Reason
Support
- Now, look at your notes and question the supports. Use the check list below.
-. 9 . 1 S. P o' * C s
Keep questioning unti- you find a weakness in the source.
IS THERE A SOURCE GIVEN?
YES (Go to number 2)
NO (Question partner)
b,/
IS THERE AN EXPLANATION GIVEN?
YES (Go to number 3) NO (Question partner)
IS THERE A DATE GIVEN?
YES (Go to number 4) NO (Question partner)

IS THE STATISTIC QUESTIONABLE?
YES (Question partner)
NO (Go to number 5)
O IS THE SOURCE'S EXPERTISE QUESTIONABLE
YES (Question partner)
NO (Go to number 6)
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THE SOURCE IS BIASED?
YES (Question partner) NO (Give up!)

[n A After you find a weakness, refute the support as follows: Signpost, Rephrase, Negation, a nd Rationale.
SIGNPOST
REPHRASE
NEGATION & WHY

RATIONALE
Critiquing n Advertisement
Don't believe everything you read!
ust because something is on TV or in the newspaper

0 cc2 a i,
C .
88
does not mean it is true. Advertisements are the best example. Read the ad below for the Kickhard Karate School. Do you trust the evidence? Circle doubtful data and question it. The first one is done for you.
S. pP *s
iWinner
Karate Scho
No. 1 choice in this year's national survey
the
of the Year Award
Air
"TIe lebest best training

Master anywhere!,i" Suzuki,: ctor at ISJCKflOIC chief instru
to learn Karate!" e a Re :
' No better place
au-srare pie oaung conesj winner
_ni'
L 11 . r l `' I L"" L
" ,,''
Find an advertisement in a newspaper, magazine, or pamphlet. What evidence do they

give for using their product or service? How many questions can you ask about the company or the product or service?
JI-e-I r
l-
.J
.
-`
'
'I.'.
Sr
. C:
1 .
`r -r _ ` ! r '1
11' A
Organizing your Refutat Ion
When organizing a first affirmative constructive speech you brought together reasons and supports and then presented them systematically to prove the resolution. Now, in
organizing the first negative constructive speech, you will bring together the skills you learned
O 1 ' . 1
90
nU , IJ ,nU
ro 'c co(i-loii
pe-opk- chouId 'e
People often think of debate as a speaking skill. However, the first step to good debate is to listen and understand your onoonent's nosition. Without
"nUi
real understanding ot the otner team/s n nts. it is impossinie to successtullv retute them.
IListen tO an atnrmative speecn
0
LISTEN
on tne resolution 1-Ul peopie
should be vegetarian." Fill in the blank spaces in the
attirmatives nouse.
Don't listen passively. You will be responsible for everything the affirmative says! Listen critically, and look for potential weaknesses in the affirmatives points and supports. Use ref utations to attack any weaknesses you find. Now, listen to the first half of a negative speech against the affirmative speech. Check (V) the refutations you hear.
nU pH 7
'c r_o!vfloii pr.o11c choi!d 'e
! n U
0
ATTACK
T5 'c Kco(ioi: f'c.oplc choi(d Lc.

v-t-ii1
, ( ,
The negative's job is not ]ust to be critical of the affirmative. The negative must also replace the affirmative house with a negative house of
superior construction.
Listen to the second half of the speech, and fill in the blanks in the negative's house.
for refuting explanations and challenging supports, along with the skills you learned for building the affirmative case, and present them systematically to disprove the resolution. Now, listen to a 1AC and organize your refutation to it.
j
-
' . " f.
7
-7
This is not necessarily true. It is

possible to raise animals and catch fish without harming the environment.
It is not true that meat is difficult to

digest. Our bodies are made to digest both meat and vegetables.
It is
This is not true. Hamburgers taste

much better than salad.
les
That is not important. Vegetables have

many important vitamins and minerals.
e e
not true that cows are cute. They are actually rather ugly animals.
Animal rights are not as important as

f od industry will lose their jobs.
human rights and, if we stop fishing or raising animals, millions of people in the
e e Z

,,
nIO
The negative is not just destructive. The negative doesn't simply attack the affirmative's
points with refutations. The negative must be constructive and offer a counter-case to the judges as well. This is where the real debate begins.
..,
91

Macro Organizat Ion

i.g y
92
for the NC
The negative team gives the second speech of the debate, the first negative constructive, or the 1 NC. The 1 NC has 5 parts: the Introduction, the Refutations, the Transition, the Negative Points, and the Conclusion. The Introduction introduces your opinion to the judges and audience. The Refutations attack the 1AC, the first affirmative speech. The Transition links the refutation portion with the negative case. The Negative Points are your own reasons and supports for your opinion and the Conclusion finishes your speech. Look at the first negative constructive speech, the iNC. on the right page. Write the letter of the portion of the speech next to the appropriate part it fills in the 1 NC flowchart below.
Affirmative
POINT 1
Affirmative
POINT 2
Refutation 1
Refutation 2
Affirmative
POINT 3
Refutation 3
Negative
POINT 1
Negative
POINT 2
Negative
POINT 3
' . " f. O 1 i
0 We have talked about health, the economy, and taste, and have shown that we should not all be vegetarian. For these reasons we beg to oppose. 0 Our second point is the economy. Millions of men and women work in agriculture, fishing, and the food industry. If we stop eating meat, they will lose their jobs. This will cause hardship. Th said that animals have a right not to suffer. 0 Their second reason was animal ts. Tey We have two responses. First, it is not true that animals have rights. Rights come from our country's Constitution, and our Constitution says nothing about animals. Second, animal rights are not as important as human rights, and if we stop fishing or raising animals, millions of people in the food industry will lose their jobs. 0 Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today we are debating the resolution, "All people should be vegetarians." We, on the negative team, strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refute the affirmative side; then I will give our points. 0 Our first point is health. We must eat meat and fish in order to stay healthy. Meat has a lot of protein, and fish has both protein and iodine. It is difficult to get these nutrients from vegetables. 0 Their third reason was the environment. They said that fishing and raising animals harm nature. We have two responses. First, this is not necessarily true. It is possible to raise animals and catch fish without harming the environment. Second, it is not true that animal farming hurts the environment, since animals produce the carbon dioxide that plants require. We must keep the balance of nature. 0 1 have refuted the affirmative's points. Now, I will give ours. We have three points: health the economy, and taste. OTheir first reason was health. They said that it is not healthy to eat meat since it is high in fat and difficult to digest. We have three responses. First, it is not true that meat is difficult to digest. Our bodies are made to digest both meat and vegetables. Second, it is not always true that meat is higher in fat than vegetables. Some fruits and vegetables, such as bananas and avocados, have a lot of fat. On the other hand, some kinds of meat, such as turkey, have very little fat. 0 Out third point is taste. Meat tastes good, and many countries use meat in their national dishes. Can you imagine Thai food without shrimp, Japanese food without sushi, American food without hamburgers or German food without Wiener schnitzel. Eating meat is enjoyable and an important part of our culture.
93
i'"
Micro Organizat Ion for the NC
You have already learned that the negative speech has 4 parts; the Introduction, the Refutations, the Negative Points, and the Conclusion. Let's look closer at the Refutations. Each Refutation has 4 parts; the Signpost, the Rephrase, the Negation which often includes a reason why, and the Rationale. You learned about Signposts in Unit 3. Rephrase means to repeat the same idea with different words. Negation means to say that something is NOT. The Rationale is where you explain your reasoning for why something was NOT.
o. r O 9 ' 1 . 1
94
LRefutation 2
Refutation
I. Signpost 2. Rephrase
POINT 1
POINT 2
3. Negation
4. Rationale
POINT 3
CONCLUSION
Look at this first refutation. We have underlined the Signpost, drawn a box around the Rephrase, double underlined the Negation and circled the Rationale for you.
Their first reason was health. Fhey said that it is not healthy to eat meat because it is hiiTTn and difficult to digest.jWe have two responses. First it is not true that meat is difficult to digest. Our bodies are made to digest both meat and vegeTi5T) Second, it is not always true that
meat is
higher in fat than vegetables. ome vegetables, such as avocadO rhave a lot
some kinds of meat, such asTFkey,Have very little fat.
Look at this refutation. Underline the Signpost, draw a box around the Rephrase, double underline the Negation and circle the Rationale.
Their second reason was animal rights. They said that animals have a right not to suffer. We have two responses. First, it is not true that animals have rights. Rights come from our Country's constitution, and our Constitution says nothing about animals. Second, animal rights are not as important as human rights. If we stop raising animals and stop fishing, millions of people in the food industry would lose their jobs.
The NC
The language used in the Negative Constructive Speeches differs slightly from the language used in the Affirmative Constructive Speeches. Read the following Introductions. Which one is from an Affirmative Constructive Speech and which one is from a Negative Constructive Speech? What are the differences?
' . R *. O i
-fn 7 rr i-r.i-i.
L(r r!r iFV
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, "All people should be vegetarian." We, on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have 3 reasons: health, animal rights, and the
environment.
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, "All people should be vegetarian." We on the negative team strongly oppose this resolution. First, I
will refute the affirmative reasons, then I will
give the negative points.
Introductions for Negative Constructive Speeches

First, I will refute the affirmative reasons, then...
Let me first refute the affirmative reasons, then... First, I will attack their case and then... I'd like to refute their points, then I will present...
, , ..',,.;,0- ,,-
The First Negative Constructive Speech and all of the speeches after it contain a Transition. The transition is used to separate your REFUTATIONS from your POINTS.
Transitions for Negative Constructive Speeches

I have refuted the affirmative's points. Now I will give the negative's point
points...
I have refuted their points. Now, let me give ours. We have _ poi
The conclusion of the Negative Constructive Speech opposes the resolution rather than
proposes it.
Conclusion for Negative Constructive Speeches
We have talked about.... and have shown that .... For these reasons, we beg to oppose.
11
95
O 1 ' . 1

r[]I[IU [4;[{-
Refutation Format
Does your country have an army or navy? In your country does everyone have to serve in the army or other branch of the military or do some people volunteer to serve? In some countries, all people must serve some time in the army. This is called national service. What are some countries that have national service? Some countries have no military. Which ones? Do you think it is good to have an army? Why or why not?
` Listen to the 1AC on the resolution "All people should have to serve in the
Take notes below.

\ /
p4
army.
esesRT
Notes
96
' . R f. l O 1
PART Z Below is the 1 NC to the 1AC, "All people should have to serve in the army"
from the previous page. Form groups and read the speech on the next two pages. The speech has been cut into pieces and mixed up. Put the speech back into the correct order. Three have been done for yo u .
Intro
ansition '
Negative Signpost 1 I..
Part2 1
Rephrase 1
O O
Negative Point
lb
ega '''''''
Rephrase 2
"
Rephrase 3
e3
97
I
in. O ' . 98
`'
A. Rich people can always find excuses to avoid national service. During the Vietnam War, Bill Clinton avoided serving in the army by moving to England.
B. It is not true that national service results in a stronger army.

C. Our first point is cost.
D. National service will increase the chance of wars with other countries. If we have a large
army, other countries will be afraid and have to increase their armies too. In general,
when two neighboring countries have very large armies, they are more likely to use
them in time of conflict. E. If you serve in the army for only 2 years, you don't learn enough to be a good soldier. It's better to have a professional army, where people serve between five and twenty years and receive more training. F. Their third point was jobs.
G. We have talked about cost, freedom, and war, and have shown that all people should not have to serve in the army. For these reasons, we beg to oppose.
H. However, it is totally untrue that national service treats everyone eq I. Our second point is freedom.
V.
J. First, I will refute the affirmative's 3 points; then I will give our own. K. Second, there are easier ways for the government to solve unemployment.
1. First, this point is not necessarily true.
M. Furthermore, if the young people are forced to join, and don't want to be there, they
will have a poor attitude and weaken the army.
N. Their second point was equality.
t O n i
Their first point was strength.

P. National service is very expensive. Every yeai one soldier costs the government over $100,000. If we multiply $100,000 by the number of young people in this country, we see that the cost is much too high. The money would better spent on hospitals and
schools.
0.' . " f .
Q. They said that if we have national service, our army will be stronger. We have two responses.
T elieve that we can reduce unemployment by putting all young people in the army.
S. Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Today, the resolution is, "All people should have to 'serve ines the army." We, on the negative team, strongly oppose this resolution.
r It can always create jobs by building more roads and train lines.
U. National service violates human rights. In a free country, people should be able to choose their own jobs. V. Our third point is war. W. France, for example, has national service, but also very high unemployment, especially among young people.
X.They said if we have national service, all citizens will share the risk of dying in a war. Y. I have refuted their 3 points; now I will give the negative points. We have three points:
cost, freedom, and war.
99
M In -Debate
In Unit 4, we learned how to organize a 1AC. In this unit we learned how to organize a
iNC. This mini-debate reviews organizing a 1AC and responding to it with a iNC.
N I n O ' . 1
100
:[I I iiY
I[IIiiU
Divide into groups of four.

Each group then
forms two debate
Each team chooses a resolution from 123 and
teams of two peop each: Team A and
1AC to hate. Be sure to choose

different resolutions.
One person from Team A gives the first affirmative constructive speech for their team.
Team B listens to the first affirmative
constructive speech, takes notes, and prepares a 1NC, a first negative constructive speech.
One person froii

Team B gives their first negative constructive speech
Team A listens and takes notes.
with refutations and the negative team's p nts.
Now switch roles. Team B gives their 1AC while

Team A listens and prepares their iNC.
. " fu O 1 ' 1
Use the house above to plan your affirmative case. Use the space below to take notes. Take notes under the 1AC heading when the other team presents its 1AC. Take notes under the 1 NC when they respond to your 1AC speech.
Ò
, Responding to an Editorial
1/7
`* `'
the4
lead
Read Ken Carr's letter to the editor below

refuting Naomi Park's letter about Highway
' . " *. . O 1
I I 11II (J Stop The Highway

I'm writing about the government's plan for the new
26. How many refutations does he make? How many points does he give in favor of Highway 26?
PROJECT Find a letter to the editor or an editorial in an English language newspaper
or magazine. Write a letter in response. Remember to use what you have learned about organizing ref utations. 02
Highway Number 26. 1 have two reasons to oppose

this plan for a new highway. My reasons are the cost
and the environment.
for
Concerning the cost, the planned highway is just too

could repair expenstve.
r the same
million dollars we
d )3Brady
C: tullaney. ra
enoughon money money just one left
Dear Editor,
I want to respond to Naomi Park ' S letter of "Stop the Highway . She thinks the Should Stop building disagree . Highway 26 . I n her letter Naomi
As for the environment, the ph through what is now

excellent farmland. This for
rare spotte 0 a bird whi

environment to build an
needs our protection. We s
April 1st, government
tue
Ellen IkIss
Ba:g
Sen
Because of the cost and th
everyone to oppose the F

Highway Number 26.
up
ergssen Marc
knarn aurdss Anne
Park said that the 3S too expensive . highway million we could She said that for the same $31 repair all of the roads J-n the City and buy new bu ses . where did Ms . Park these figures Further, she does not explain might need
repair all
of
![
Sincerely ,
NOt1I
-q
Our house is better because...
No! Our house is better because...
O O n l o
Oiir .1 r. I B
.J ts ". e
i i.
S " 1.
TrZT*
Debating an Opinion
. 8 r . 0 1
104
The First Affirmative
Constructive Speech
(The 1AC)
The Second Affirmative Constructive Speech
(The 2AC)
The Second Negative
Constructive Speech
Here is a typical six-speech debate. There are two debaters on the affirmative
team, and two on the negative team.
(The 2NC)
Which team speaks first? Which team speaks last? What is the function of each speech? Match the description of each of the speeches on the next page with the speech on this page. The first one is done for you.
U . 8
This is the first speech of the debate. In this speech, the affirmative's first speaker constructs the affirmative's case. This is the only speech in the debate that doesn't include refutations.
. 1 9 0
In this speech, the second negative speaker continues the attack on the affirmative case, and then supports the negative case by refuting the affirmative team's attack and by adding new supports. This is the last of the constructive speeches of the debate. After this speech, no new reasons or supports may be added. The debaters are finished constructing their cases. Next, the rebuttal speeches begin.
.

An
0. OP.
This is the negative team's first speech of the debate. In this speech, the negative team must first attack the affirmative's case and then build
their own case.
7
-7
This is the last speech of the debate. The first affirmative speaker compares the affirmative and negative cases and explains why the affirmative has won the debate.

In this speech, the second affirmative speaker begins the attack on the negative team's case. Then, this debater su pports the affirmative case by refuting the negative's attack and by a dding new supports to
the case.
.-,<:
Y
This is the first rebuttal speech of the debate. The rebuttal speeches analyze the debate. The speakers explain to the judges and to the audience which team has won the debate. In this speech, the first negative speaker compares the affirmative and negative points and explains why the negative team has won the debate.
How many constructive speeches are there in a debate? How many rebuttal speeches are there? What is the function of the rebuttal speeches?
05
Debate Formats
There are many different debate formats. Sometimes one person debates against another
person; other times a team debates against another team. Teams can have 2, 3, 4, or even more people. Sometimes the affirmative speaks first and last, other times the affirmative speaks first and the negative speaks last. In this textbook, we have used the American Parliamentary format. But you can choose the format that is best for your
0.7. . g A= O P
class. Have fun trying out different formats, or invent your own! Try the same topic
using different formats!
I
First Affirmative Constructive 4,
\/ Xq
Negative Constructive
5,
Second Affirmative Constructive 3'
Negative Rebuttal
6'
Affirmative Rebuttal 4,
I
1AC: First Affirmative Speaker 8'
1NC: First Negative Speaker 8'
2AC: Second Affirmative Speaker 8'
2NC: Second Negative Speaker 8'
AR: First Affirmative Speaker 4,
NR: First Negative Speaker
4'
06
. >. . V
Affirmative Points -+ 4, (First Affirmative Speaker) Affirmative Attack -+ 3' (Second Affirmative Speaker)
~/l
Negative Points -+ 4,
(First Negative Speaker) Negative Attack -+ 3' (Second Negative Speaker)
Affirmative Rebuttal -+ 3' (Third Affirmative Speaker)
Negative Rebuttal
3'
OPi.i
(Third Negative Speaker)
. r] F7:
Lfr F
1AC Present Affirmative Case: 1st Affirmative Speaker -+ 6'
iNC
Attack 1AC: 1st Negative Speaker - 3'
Present Negative Case: 2nd Negative Speaker -+ 3'
I'
2AC
Attack 1NC: 2nd Affirmative Speaker - 3' Rebuild Affirmative Case: 3rd Affirmative Speaker -, 3'
2NC Attack 2NC: 3rd Negative Speaker -+ 3' Rebuild Negative Case: 4th Negative Speaker -+ 3'
NR
AR
Negative Rebuttal: 5th Negative Speaker - 3'
Affirmative Rebuttal: 4th Affirmative Speaker -+ 3'
107
Responding to Attacks
n the 2AC or the 2NC, the speaker has two jobs. First, they must attack the other team's case. We studied how to do this in Unit 5, Refuting Explanations, and Unit 6, Challenging Supports. Secondly, they must respond to attacks made on their case by the other team. We respond to attacks in 4 steps. =. 1 An o 1.10. t s oeb . n i
1 . SIGN POST
.m;
Our first point was cost.
Our first point was...
2. REPH ASE POINT We said that... because...

108
We said that cats make better pets than dogs because cats are cheaper than dogs.
3. EPHRASE ATTACK
They said that this was not true because...
The other team claimed that this is not always true because... They responded that this was not necessarily true because... Our opponents stated that this was not important because... They tried to refute this by saying it was not relevant because... They answered that this is not significant because... They promised that this was easy to solve because...
4. ANSWER ATTACK
They tried to refute this saying that cost was not

relevant because you can
get a pet for free from an animal shelter.
However, this is not true because... But this is not important because... However, their refutation misses the point because...
However their refutation
misses the point because animals from shelters are often not healthy and difficult to train. You should always get pets from a pet store, and dogs do cost more than cats in a pet store!
The Rebuttal ,
The last speeches in a debate are called the rebuttals. The purpose of a rebuttal is to
summarize the debate and explain why your side has won.
. . 80 .1 1 O1.1
Example Introduction for a Rebuttal Speech
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. We have been debating the resolution, "Cats are
better pets than dogs. We have clearly shown that this is (or is not) true. Let's look
at the major points of this debate.
Their only important points have been...
They lose their point about... ' because they never gave any reason or support. ' because we refuted that... and they never answered our refutation. ' because they never showed that it was more important than our point... because it is not true since...
' because it is not important since...
' they never talked about it.
' they never gave any reason why it's not true or important. ' they didn't answer our response that... ' they responded... but this is not true since...
' they responded... but this is not important since...
We win this debate because...
' their points have fallen, while our points still stand. the most important point in this debate is... which we have won.
09
['Ti1 1[]I[I U 'i4[[-
Rebuttal Speeches
>. p O in o . r l . . 8
0
Form smal- groups and read the Negative Rebuttal speech on the next page. The speech
has been cut into pieces and mixed up. Put the speech back into the correct order. Write
the letter of the pieces in the spaces provided. The first piece has been done for you.
Introduction-Part
''''''''''"''''
Form smal- groups. The Affirmative Rebuttal speech on page 131 has been cut into pieces and the pieces mixed up and handed out to the class. Put the speech back into the correct order. Write the letter of the pieces in the spaces provided.
Rebuttal 1
1
Point 3
part 1
Transition
O. V 1 . 8
'.. ........ '''J - --,------A. Our second point was help. B. First, the affirmative team talked about cost. C. Our first point was protection. D. The affirmative team responded that cats catch mice, but this is not important. My
partner explained that you can always buy mousetraps if you have a problem with mice. E. Overall, we win our key points, and have refuted the affirmative team. Therefore, we
OPi. i
win this debate, and ask you to choose dogs instead of cats! Thank you! F. We explained that dogs are more useful than cats.
G. Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. We have been debating the resolution, "Cats are
better pets than dogs." We, on the negative team, have clearly shown that this is not true. H. They lose this point, however, because it is not true that a dog costs more than a cat. As we said before, it is easy to get a dog for free at an animal shelter.
----
----
herefore, we win this point, since the affirmative team has never responded to this.
T he affirmative team never showed that cats have any significant use.
J. Let's look again at the important points of this debate. K. We explained that a dog can protect you from thieves.
L. They responded by saying that house alarms are better than dogs. We win this point, however,
since the affirmative team never explained why an expensive house alarm is better than a loving dog. M. They lose this point, howevei since my partner clearly explained that it is possible to teach a dog to be quiet.
`,*
','','.,',,,*.`66,
N. The affirmative also talked about noise. They said that cats are quieter than dogs.
On our side, we had two main points: protection and help.

111
` Debate Chain
This is the fina- project of this book. In this project you wi
review everything that you
U . 8 0.7 ing
0.
have learned so far.
Form groups of six people or less. Choose a resolution that your group is interested in.
Dayl
One person writes a lAG and passes it to a second

person in the group.
the lAG and writes a 1NC, and passes both the lAG and the iNC to a third person.
Day Z
The second person reads
pi A. O
114
4,,,, _/
__ /
,,
Day 3
The third person reads
both speeches and writes a 2AC and passes it, and the
The fourth person reads all the speeches and adds a - 2NC, and passes it , and the
Day4
other speeches, on to the next person.
other speeches, to the next person.

,,',, -
'',,we
-
/,' -
[[Ees
__
-=,','-,,4',
,/,
the speeches, writes the - negative rebuttal speech
Day5
The fifth person reads all
, The last nerson reads all
and passes it, and the other speeches, to the last person.
,,>/ /=,'.
) the speeches, writes the affirmative rebuttal and other speeches, to the teacher. passes it, and the
Day 6
,/
,,-,[EI
-/,,
//.
= -
_ee
`'4, -
,',',,,I
) / _/,''',,,,/, .__ ,= /,4=-=4 ,,,,=/,_ ,,',,,./-, ,=4,',
,, 4 ,=,=;/
,.,,
///
4-
=.
;,_,/,_,,,4,
_/,//
,,,,,,,, _'/,,=_ __/___ /,,, ,,,',',, , ,/.,,-=*,,,,ee=/,,
= ,=/ ,4=,,,=, '
/, ,,,,- ,
_ _ _, ,
How to Judge a Debate

How to judge a debate? Often, both the affirmative and negative team have strong reasons, supports, and refutations. If you are the judge, it can be difficult to decide who wins and who loses. The first rule of judging is: relax, and follow your feelings. In a debate, the debaters are supposed to make a good impression on the judge and audience. If one team made a much stronger impression on you than the other, they probably debated better than the other team. As you judge the debate, you want to compare the two teams in three areas: matter, manner; and method. MATER Matter relates to each team's logic and reasoning. You should ask yourself questions like: Were their reasons clear and easy to understand? Did each reason have a good support? Did they refute the other team's reasons and supports clearly? Did they defend their points well from the other team's refutations? In the rebuttal, did they explain why their points stand, and the other team's points fall? MANNER Manner relates to each team's speaking style. You should ask yourself questions like: Were the speeches easy to understand? Were the speeches interesting? Did they speak clearly, with good pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary? Did they have good voice, eye 11

contact, gestures, and posture? Did they make a good impression on the
udience? Did they use humor?
METHOD Method relates to each team's organization. You should
7sp poil Did each team balance making their own points and refuting the other team? In the rebuttal, did they explain why they have won the debate? WEIGHT ' Different debate rules give different weights to matter, manner and method. American debate tends to emphasize matter; British debate tends to
emphasize manner; Australian debate tends to emphasize method. However; all three aspects of debate are important, and you should consider all three when deciding which team has won the debate.
15
A very good way to improve your debating skills is to be a judge. Learning to look at a debate from
the judge's point of view will give you a better idea about what persuades a judge and what doesn't.
When judging a debate it is important to flow the debate, and then use your flow notes to fill in the judging form. Different debate tournaments use different forms. There is a Discover Debate Judging
Form, identical to the one below, available to download from the internet at http://www.compasspub.com/debate PART I In this section, judge each speech on Matter Method, and Manner. You must give each speech a score on a scale of 1 to 10. Then, add up the scores. Usu ly, but not always, the
team with the highest score wins the debate. Occasionally, one team will have poor scores for
Manner, but their Method and Matter persuades the judge to agree with them. Hence, they win the debate. But that is a rare case. Usually, the winner can be decided by simply adding up the scores.
In the case of a tie, look at the rebuttal speeches. Which team did a better job explaining why they won the debate? PART II In this section, write comments about each speech. To help the speakers improve in
the future, it is important to give honest, direct feedback.
You can comment on good things the

speaker should continue to do, or on
bad things the speaker needs to change to become a better debater. You can
give comments about Matter, Method, or Nfanner.
biscover bebate Judging Form

Name of Jadge: Resolution:
Speaker Points
1
"1 1-4 Fuji
Rate speeches on a scale of 1-10 5-6 Average: 7-8 Above Average; 9-10 Excellent)
N 1 R 1 0 se 1 l 1 3 0 0 110
AR ll 1 l e o 1o s 0l30
Speeches:
Manner:
1 AC
/10 /10 /10 /30
1 NC /10 /10 /10
2AC /10 /10 /10
2NC
/10 /10 /10
Method:
PART III In the final section,

explain which team won and why they
Matter:
Total:
/30
/30
/30
(crieral Comments: Give feedback mn cacti of the speeches

1st AC Speech: 1st NC Speech: 2nd AC Speech: 2nd NC Speech Negative Rebuttal: Affirmative Rebuttal:
won. Don't just say they have won

because they have a higher score.
Explain why they got a higher score.
For example, explain why you scored the winning team high in Matter and the losing team low in Method.
Decision: In my judgment the svittner of this debate is: 0 The Affimuative Team. 0 The Negattve Team
I believe they have won this debate hecause
Judges Signature
116
" Flow
' o. b OSc . 0
1`8
Complete Debate
: After the 1AC, stop and predict the negative's
Town, South Africa, should

Listen to a debate on the resolution, "Cape
iNC. and take a flow

Now, listen to the
host the next Olympic
Games. Take a flow of
response. Prepare a iNC speech in the space below.
in the space below.
the 1AC in the space

below.
After the iNC. stop and predict the affirmative's response. Prepare a 2AC speech in the space below.
Now, listen to the 2AC, and take a flow in the space below.
=n . .
O S ' . r o .
After the 2AC, stop and predict the negative's response. Prepare a 2NC speech in the space below.
Now, listen to the 2NC, and take a flow in the space below.
O S I . ' . . O
20
After the 2NC, stop and predict the negative rebuttal. Prepare a NR speech in the space below.
Now, listen to the NR, and take a flow in the space below.
S cover OeV f e O. OI
121
After the NR, stop and predict the affirmative's last response. Prepare an AR speech in the space below.
Now, listen to the AR, and take a flow in the space below.
. 0 O S c b '
O
Look over the flow for the entire debate. Which team do you think has won? Why?
122
7
' 1 ,
rT7 n : T.T TL
' , ' `
IOPICS
Choose from these topics.
r
..
' . . O S c 06
People should ye the

t to die.
MEDICINE / HEALTh

afl'
\ eG0a \S S" better
` salJew%
f
an patiehitS poctors incUr2e diSe2"" Abortion should banned/allowed.
G COrn O

0\d
catiOfl
O Students
should have to study ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, O Students should not have to study,eeeeeeee- d.ttetent classes . students should be in
strong students
OStudents
we
g Students should D e should not be allowed to_,,,,_-
and allowed to___________________
pr
The gover
whaling.
ODiverse
speces. commercial endaflgr ed nmeflt should ban
otect
or\S.
oufl
sea
oU\'
1n
\l aCa'onb'
OWe shoutd take
next vacation
countries countries.
r than homogeneous
greater effort to
Companies hire more should minorities." make Onethi should rd be reserved of all seats for wo in
at\e'
l1
0neS.
23
Advanced Topics
Here are some advanced topics for advanced debaters Once you have tried out the new
debate skills that you have learned on some easier topics, you might like to try debating a more advanced topic. Here are some resolutions taken from actual American debate
tournaments. Good -uck, and enjoy debate I
O s I O * . .
24
The state should/should not seek the death
This country should be pacifist.
penalty in capital cases involving persons under the aze of eighteen.
The government should use force to make peace.
We should study world history rather than domestic history.
econolmc The gov ernment growth environment. for should the good sacrifice of
The government should force integration of the sexes in professional sports.
The people should reject big government.
shollld Increase The go vernment ion of weapons.

regulat
dictat0rsh'P
ould have Developi' g nations si a democracy. rather than
Fun is more important than work.
1 1:
Strip Speech for Unit 4 (page 56)

0 Finally, many more people work in convenience stores. If there are no cigarette sales, convenience stores will lose money and have to cut the num her of workers
0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
Millions of people all over the world work in the tobacco industry and will lose their jobs if
cigarettes are banned.
XX X
We have talked about smokers' rights, taxes, and jobs. We have shown that cigarette smoking should be allowed. We beg to propose. Cigarette taxes make much money for the government. Our third point is jobs.
According to the tax office, the government collected $40,000,000 dollars in cigarette taxes
last year.
X X
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. The resolution today is, "Cigarette smoking should be
allowed."
We believe that people have the right to smoke.
XX X X X X X X
Our first point is smokers' rights. We, on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have three reasons:
smokers' rights, taxes, and jobs.
According to the Agricultural Ministry, at least 200,000 people work on tobacco farms. In addition, according to the Department of Commercial Affairs, as many as 500,000 more people work for the cigarette companies.
Our second point is taxes.
People should have the freedom to do what they want, as long as they don't hurt others. Furthermore, those tax dollars are important. The Minister of Finance said in an interview recently, "If we lose the taxes from cigarettes, we will have to take money away from schools and hospitals." (Newshour, May 3, 1998) According to Dr. Marsha Blacktooth of California University, "Smoking cigarettes in your own home doesn't hurt anyone else. In a free country, people should be allowed to smoke."
(Smokers' Magazine, May, 1999)
12
This is not true. There are many safeguards against accidental launch of nuclear weapons!
LNuclear They weapons POINT are should very CARD be expensive.I abolished.
P NT CARO
Nuclear weapons should be banned to make the world more peaceful. If we have nuclear weapons, other countries may be afraid and attack us. countries won't want to attack us.
If we ban nuclear weapons, other That example is not relevant!
Chernobyl was a nuclear power plant, not a nuclear weapon!
P NT CARD
Nuclear weapons should be abolished
This point is not true! Nuclear weapons are no more expensive than other weapons.
because they are dangerous! Nuclear weapons are radioactive and harm the environment. Remember Chernobyl!
POINT CARD Nuclear weapons should be abolished because they are dangerous! A country might launch a nuclear weapon by accident!
This is not true. If we have nuclear weapons, other countries will be afraid to attack us!
127
``,
```
I
,
That is not true! Just because you have a gun, doesn't mean you can go hunting. You need a car, a hunting
license, and innocent animals to kill.
I L . ] : r1
That is not relevant! Popular opinion is often wrong.
L N People POINT guns. should if you Youhave can be CARD allowed go a gun. hunting to have
POINT CARD
People should be allowed to have
guns. Having guns is a basic human right.
That's not always true. Many gun owners don't know how to use guns, so they often have accidents. They don't protect themselves,
they shoot themselves!
That's not true. Human rights include things like freedom of speech. Human rights don't include the right to have guns!
29
Strip Speech for Unit 8 (page 1 10)
O Instead, they showed us a book saying that you can teach a dog to be quiet. However, hooks about teaching don't always work. There are many math textbooks at the bookstore; it doesn't mean that everyone can learn math easily. Similarly, you cannot teach all dogs not to bark. So, in genera!, cats are quieter than dogs, an we win this third and final point.
000 0 00 00 0 0
0 00 000 0
We said that cats are quieter than dogs. The negative team had two points: protection and help. In conclusion, we have won all three of our points, and the negative has lost both of their's. And clearly, we have won this debate. Thank you. The negative team loses because they have not listened to, understood, or answered our points. Let's look at the important points of this debate. Our first point was cost.
The negative team also loses, their help point. They said that dogs help people, but my partner clearly showed that this is not always true.
X XX X
Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. The negative team responded that cats make a lot of noise at night. We showed that this is easy to solve: keep your cat inside at night. The negative team never answered this. In this debate, the resolution has been that cats make better pets than dogs. We, on the affirmative team, win this debate because we have clearly shown this to be true. They lose their protection point, because we showed that you can always buy a house alarm. They said that house alarms are more expensive than dogs, but this is not true. You don't have to feed a house alarm for years, and years, and years.
X X
X XXXXXX
Please remember in the second affirmative speech, my partner said that most dogs don't help people. Only special dogs with special training do. We said that cats are easier to train than dogs.
Let us look now at our points.
Our third point was about noise.

Our second point was care.
We said that cats are cheaper than dogs. They responded that you can get dogs for free from the animal shelter. Howevei my partner explained that dogs from the animal shelter are often difficult to train and are not healthy. Again the negative never answered this response. Therefore, we win this point, too.
The negative team never answered the point about care at any time. Therefore, we win this point, too. x
131
The authors would like to thank the following people:

John McLaughlin for his kind support in promoting the book with us, excellent copyediting skills and crucial help in the final stages of production. Joseph Dilenschneider and Robert Weshcler for their keen eyes and superior copyediting skills that made this book even better the second and third time around. Graham Bathgate, Allan Murphy, and Jerry Winn at ELEC for piloting parts of the book.
Barbara Wells at Soka University.
Keith Lane for performing the Herculean task of arranging the 1999 Distinguished Lecturer Tour of Kyushu and allowing a preview of the book at six JALT Chapters. Bill Pellowe for creating the website of the Kyushu Tour. All the JALT members in Kyushu, especially Tim Allen in Nagasaki, Peg Orleans in Kitakyushu, and Joe Tomei in Kumamoto. Special thanks to the faculty of Miyazaki International University for giving us the opportunity to present to their entire freshmen class. Rieko Nagamasa, Claire Tyers, Sachiko Ikeda, Sophia and Makoto Shang, and Hisako Sokei in Kagoshima. Don Hinkleman in Hokkaido for his early support and enthusiasm for this book. Brent Jones for the invitation to Kobe to speak on debate. Special thanks to Hali Bogo of Sagami Women's University High School for her advice and support as the first draft was written and piloted. The 1998-9 Oral Communication "C" class at Sagami Women's University High School, who sat through the first testing of this book and suffered through many revisions. The staff of The English Resource, David Maher, Noriko Ogawa, Miyoko Abe, Akiko Fujita, Toyoko Nagai, Tony Dobbie, Michio Abe, Miho Amemiya, Reiko Hisatake, Kimie Tanaka, Yoko Terada, Yumiko Oki, Izumi Kato, Dana Chaffin, Mieko Yoshinaga, Raphael Bourgeois. Special thanks to Chris "Tiger" Bartlett for logistical support and enthusiasm, and to Chikako Koyama and Chidori Ando for their hard work and long hours making this book look good.
Michael Lubetsky would like to thank:
Professor Shigeru Matsumoto, for welcoming me to the world of academic debate in Japan, and for opening up many professional opportunities. Professor Thomas Winant of International Christian University, for his friendship and encouragement during my years coaching the ICU Parliamentary Debate Team. The dedicated and tireless students of the KUEL Parliamentary Debate Committee and the ICU Debate Society, under whose leadership parliamentary debate in Japan has reached international standards. The equally dedicated and tireless teachers of the Nagano English Club League Debate Tournament, whose pioneering efforts at the high-school level have become a model for the rest of the country. Jason Gottlieb, Sailaja Sastry, Michael Henderson, Dennis Waechter, Kathleen Hall, Kevin Tuttle, Laurie Smith, Michael and Inga Tepei Michal Cahlon, and Michael Farago, for their years of
33
support and friendship.

Finally, to Skip Swanson, for joining me on a two year adventure of healing and growth.
Charles LeBeau would like to thank:

My life support system, (Bill, Michael, Yuko, Sal, Satoru, and Adam) for their unswerving loyalty,
encouragement, and faith. MJ, God's gift to us, ever reminding us that the impossible is always possible--even in the fourth quarter with the clock running out.
And most of all, my family (Nobuko, Ray, and Jay) with apologies for not being around many
holidays or weekends during the last 3 years.
David Harrington would like to thank:

Mami Ushida, Kikiyo Harrington, and Tsukasa Harrington for showing him that Peace Love and Happiness is all that really matters. Just know that I love you and that you give me that peace and
happiness.
My sister, Rebecca, my brother, Dick, cousins, Trudy and Nancy and all of their families because
family really is important. All of the friends that help me keep it together, especially Masami, Kaori, Kagetora, Jonathan, Keiko, Hiroko, Joe, Tomoko, Pat, Jeff, Pancho, David, and Tanuki master. Michael H. Lubetsky taught for four years at Sagami Women's University High School, and coached
the debate society at International Christian University. As a student at Princeton, he was the top
speaker at the 1993 North American Debate Championships. He has attended the World University Debate Championships six times as both a debater and judge, and sat on the Grand Final Adjudication Pane! in 1997. After four years of teaching and writing, he has embarked on a new career in Her Majesty's Canadian Foreign Service.
Charles LeBeau was once an aspiring jazz musician a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Since landing in Japan in 1982, he has taught in both the university and corporate worlds. Currently, he is chief instructor at NIC Tokyo, conducting its two-day Power Presentation and Power Negotiation seminars. He is co-author with David Harrington of Speaking o2Speech, basic presentation skills for beginners and author of "Multimedia Presentations" in Multimedia Language Teaching.
David Harrington has taught English to speakers of other languages for over 15 years. David has taught students of almost every age and circumstance from preschoolers to graduate students. He is the founder of The English Resource and the co-author of Speaking of Speech, Whats in the Cards, and Street Speak.
134
Track 2-15 (p.4)

Listen to the opinion. Do you agree or disagree? Run to the corner marked agree or disagree. Repeat for each opinion. ' The country is better than the city. 2. The city is better than the country. 3. Cats make better pets than dogs. 4. Cats are superior to dogs as pets. 5. Math is the most important subject. 6. English is the most important subject. 7. The government should lower taxes. 8. The government should decrease taxes. 9. Baseball is more exciting than soccer. 10.Baseball is not as exciting as soccer. 11.Eating fast food is not healthy. 12. Eating fast food is good for you. 13. Spaceships have visited Earth already. 14.UFOs have already visited Earth.
Transc pts V
3. Man 1: I was watching sports classics on TV the other day and they had this show about Michael Jordan. Man! I believe that he is the greatest athlete of all time. Nlan 2: I know what you mean. I think so, too. But you know, soccer fans, especially in Brazil, think Pele is the greatest athlete of all time Man 1: Yeah, I've heard that. But I still think Jordan was a better athlete than Pele. Man 2: Yeah me, too. Remember that last shot in game 6 of the 1998 finals against Utah when he stole the ball and...
Track 16-20 (p.

Listen to the four conversations at the party. What are the people talking about in each conversation? Do the speakers agree or disagree? Are they talking about an opinion of fact, value or policy? Fill in the boxes. 1. Man: Would you like something to eat? I'll go get you one of those little sandwiches over there. Woman: Oh, Thank you. Can you get me one of those sandwiches on whole wheat brown bread? Man: Why? Don't you like white bread? Woman: Yeah, white bread is OK hut I think that brown bread tastes better. Man: Really? I've never liked brown bread very much 2. Man: Would you mind not smoking?
Woman: Excuse me?
4. Woman 1: Do you wanna go to a concert this weekend. There's a big outdoor concert in the park. Woman 2: Nah, not really. I think it's going to rain this weekend. Woman 1: No it's not... I saw the weather forecast in the paper. It's gonna be beautiful weather. Woman 2: I doubt it. It always rains when I go to an outdoor concert.
V
Track 21-27 (pp.l8, 19)
Listen to the short conversations. What is each person's opinion? What reason do they give? Write the reason under each picture. The first one is done for you. 1. Archie: Look at that woman on TV. She sure does know how to do those math problems. Math is probably the most important subject in school. Ethel: Really? What makes you say that? Archie: Well, because we use math everyday of our lives. Ethel: Oh! 2. Guy: Marilyn: Science fiction movies are so cool. Don't
you think?
Man: I said, "Would you mind not smoking?" Woman: Are you serious? This is a party. People always smoke at parties, and I think that I have the right to smoke in here. Man: I'm sorry, but cigarette smoke makes me
sick.
Guy:
Marilyn:
Un huh. Oh, I love science fiction movies, too. Ya know, I'm certain that UFOs have already visited Earth. Why is that? Well, it's because many people have seen
them
Woman: Well, why don't you go outside on the Icony? Man: I think I have the right to be in here. Smokers should smoke outside on the balcony.
3. Son:
Mom:
Mom, I'm sure glad we live in the city. Oh, Really? Why is that, hun?
35
Son: Mom:
Living in the city is better than living in the country because there are so many cool computer stores in the city. Ah, that's nice honey.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today we are debating the resolution, "Soccer is a better sport than baseball." We on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have four reasons: cost, excitement, simplicity, and
color.
4. Chuck: Look at this, Harry! Another tax increase. Harry: Yeah, I know what you mean. The government should lower taxes. Chuck: Yeah! The government should lower taxes because lower taxes help the economy to grow. Harry: Right! 5. Wife: What are you reading? Hubby: The sports page, dear. There's an article here about soccer. Wife: Oh, I like soccer. Soccer is so much more interesting and exciting than baseball. Hubby: Mm? What makes you say that? Wife: In soccer the action never stops. In baseball, players just stand around a lot. 6. Radio: Food scientists have discovered that eating fast food is not healthy. Driver: Hmm? I wonder why they said that? It must be because fast food is high in fat. Radio: The reason, the scientists said, was because fast food is high in fat. Driver: I thought so. Radio: Stay tuned for sports next on WFAT.
Our first point is cost. Soccer tickets are much cheaper than baseball tickets. In this city, the price of a ticket to a baseball game is about three times higher than the price of a ticket to a soccer game. Our second point is excitement. Soccer is much more exciting than baseball. In baseball, 90% of the time the players are just standing around waiting. Soccer has action all the time. Our third point is simplicity. Soccer is much easier than baseball. Baseball rules take hours to explain, and you need a bat, glove, and baseball diamond to play. Soccer rules are easy, and all you need is a soccer ball and a field. Our fourth point is color. Soccer uniforms are much more colorful than baseball uniforms. The New York Yankees, for example, have one of the most boring uniforms in the world. In conclusion, we have talked about cost, excitement, simplicity, and color. We have shown that soccer is a much better sport than baseball. For these reasons we beg to
propose.
Track 30 (p.52)
Listen and fill in the words. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. We are debating the resolution "Soccer is a better sport than baseball." We on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have 4 reasons: cost, excitement, simplicity, and color.
I
Track 28 (p.35)
Listen and check your answers. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, the government should raise taxes. The government needs more money to provide better
services.
Track 31 (p.55)
Listen and fill in the missing words. Ladies and gentlemen, we have talked about cost, excitement, simplicity, and color and have clearly shown that soccer is a better sport than baseball. For these reasons we beg to propose.
First, according to the Finance Minister, important services will have to be cut if taxes are not increased. Second, it will take 15 million more dollars to complete construction on that new subway. Third, without more money the government can't provide training for people without jobs. And finally, tax increases in Sweden have improved the quality of government services for everyone in that country. Thank you for your support.
Track 32 (p.5o)
Part 1
Listen and check your answers. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today the resolution is: "Smoking should he banned." We, on the affirmative team, strongly support this resolution. We have 3 reasons: health, hospital costs, and pollution.
LI 1l
Our first point is "Health."

Cigarettes fill your lungs with poisonous chemicals causing cancer and lung disease. According to the American Cancer Society, every cigarette you smoke shortens your life by approximately 7 minutes.
Track 29 (p.48) Listen to the speech and fill in the blanks with the numbers from the house. Some numbers may be used more than once The first one is done for you.
136
Furthermore, this has directly affected my life. My grandfather died of lung cancer two years ago. It was a long illness, and it caused my family much stress and
sadness.
According to the Tax Office, the government collected 400 million dollars in cigarette taxes last year. Furthermore, those tax dollars are important. The Minister of Finance said in an interview recently, "If we lose the taxes from cigarettes, we will have to take money away from schools and hospitals." (NewsHour,
May 3, 1998)
Our second point is "hospital costs." Smokers cost the country a Jot of money.
Our third point is "jobs." This is because smokers get cancer and other diseases more than non-smokers. Smokers miss more work and spend more time in the hospital. Millions of people all over the world work in the tobacco industry and will lose their jobs if cigarettes are banned. Also, according to the Ministry of Health, the average smoker requires over $200,000 in hospital costs over the According to the Agricultural Ministry, at least 200,000 course of their lives. The total bill for the country is over people work on tobacco farms. $50,000,000 a year. In addition, according to the Department of Commercial Our third point is "Pollution." Affairs, as many as 500,000 more people work for
cigarette companies.
Cigarettes make the air dirty. This is because when people smoke, they blow many poisonous gases into the air. This is a big problem on train platforms, where many people ignore the "no smoking" signs and blow smoke in your face. We should ban cigarettes to get rid of this problem. We have talked about health, hospital costs, and pollution. We have shown clearly that cigarettes should be banned. We beg to propose. Finally, many more people work in convenience stores. If there are no cigarette sales, convenience stores will lose money and have to cut the number of workers. We have talked about smokers' rights, taxes, and jobs. We have shown that cigarette smoking should be allowed. We beg to propose.
ri
Track 34 (p.71)
Listen to an affirmative speech on the resolution: "It's better to be married than single." Take notes in the left column. For each reason, think of a refutation. Write your rcfutations in the right column. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. We are debating the resolution: "It's better to be married than single." We on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have four reasons: housework, cost, love, and advice. Our first point is "housework." If you are married, your husband or wife can help you around the house. Your wife or husband can help you with the cooking or cleaning, which takes a lot of time. According to a new government survey, husbands and wives now help equally in the household. It makes your life iiuch easier. Our second point is "cost." It is much cheaper to be married than to be single. This is because you can share expenses such as food or rent. Also, married people pay lower taxes than single people. Our third point is "love." Marriage increases the amount of love in your life. It's wonderful to come home every night to someone who cares about you. It's sad to be home at night all by yourself. Our fourth point is advice. If you are married, you can talk about your problems with your husband or wife. It helps to talk to other people about your problems.
Track 33 .56)
Part 2
Listen and check your answers. Thank you Ladies and Gentlemen. The resolution today is "Cigarette smoking should be allowed." We, on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have 3 reasons: smokers' rights, taxes, and jobs. Our first point is "smokers' rights." We believe that people have the right to smoke. People should have the freedom to do what they want, as long as they don't hurt others. According to Dr. Marsha Blacktooth of California University, "Smoking cigarettes in your own home doesn't hurt anyone else. In a free country, people should be allowed to smoke." (Smokers' Magazine, May, 1999) Our second point is "taxes." Cigarette taxes make much money for the government.
37
Keeping your feelings to yourself is not healthy. It has been shown that married people live longer than single people. Ladies and gentlemen, we've talked about housework, cost, love, and advice, and have clearly shown that "It's better to be married than single." For these reasons we beg to propose.
affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have three reasons: health, animal rights, and the environment. Our first point is "health." It is not healthy for people to eat meat. Meat, especially beef, is very, very high in fat. Meat is also more difficult to digest than fruits or vegetables. Vegetables have all the vitamins, minerals, and protein that we need to live. If we eat only fruits and vegetables,
we will be much healthier.
Track 35-4 1 (p.83)

Part 1 A debater is proving the resolution: "Cats arc better pets than dogs." Her first point is that cats are cheaper than dogs. She has six supports, but each support has a problem. Listen and match each support with its problem. The first one is done for you. My first point is cost, cats are cheaper than dogs. 1. According to the May 1999 issue of Animal Weekly magazine, cats make far better pets than dogs because cats are less expensive. 2. Cats cost only $100 while, on the other hand, dogs
Our second point is "animal rights." Eating meat violates the rights of animals. It is wrong to kill an animal or take a baby animal away from its mother. We should not cause animals to feel pain and suffering. We should respect all living beings. Our third point is "the environment." Raising animals
hurts the environment. We cut down rain forests to make
farms for cows. We also destroy life in the sea, catching more and more fish. Vegetables need less space and grow much more quickly. They do less damage to the environment. By eating only vegetables, we help protect our planet. We have talked about "health," "animal rights," and "the environment," and have shown that all people should be vegetarian. We beg to propose. Track 43 (pp.90, 91) Now, listen to the first half of a negative speech against the affirmative speech. Check the refutations you hear. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, "All people should be vegetarian." We on the negative team strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refute the affirmative side, then I will give our points. Their first reason was "health." they said that it is not healthy to eat meat, since it is high in fat and difficult to digest. We have three responses. First, it is not true that meat is difficult to digest. Our bodies are made to digest both meat and vegetables. Second, it is not always true that meat is higher in fat than vegetables. Some fruits and vegetables, such as bananas and avocados, have a lot of fat. On the other hand, some kinds of meat, such as turkey, have very little fat. Their second reason was "animal rights." They said that animals have a right not to suffer. We have two responses. First, it is not true that animals have rights. Rights come from our country's constitution, and our constitution says nothing about animals. Second, animal rights are not as important as human rights, and if we stop fishing or raising animals, millions of people in the food industry will lose their jobs. Their third reason was "the environment." They said that
fishing and raising animals harm nature. We have two
cost $200 or more.
3. Also, according to my English teacher, cats are cheaper than dogs because cats are smaller. 4. Furthermore, in her book Cats for Me, famous pet expert Dr. Woof, claimed that keeping a cat as a pet cost less than keeping a dog because of their size differences and the amount of food they eat. 5. According to the pamphlet Ten Reasons to Buy a Cat published in 1998 by the Necko Cat Food Company, cats are the economical choice because the cost of feeding a cat is lower than the cost of feeding a dog. '. Finally, at one pet store I saw recently there was a cat on display in the front window priced at $100 while the dog on display in the very same window was priced at over $350. This statistically proves that dogs on the average are more expensive than cats, thus cats would make the cheaper pet.
Track 42 (pp.90, 91)

Listen to an affirmative speech on the resolution "All people should be vegetarian." Fill in the blanks in the
affirmative's house.
responses. First, this is not necessarily true. It is possible to raise animals and catch fish without harming the environment. Second, it is not true that animal farming hurts the environment, since animals produce the carbon dioxide that plants require. We must keep the balance of nature.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. We are debating the resolution: "All people should he vegetarian." We on the
38
Track 44 (pp.9O, 91 )
Listen to the second half of the speech and fill in the blanks in the negative's house. I have refuted the affirmative points; now I will give ours. We have three points: "health," "the economy," and "taste." Our first point is "health." We must eat meat and fish in order to stay healthy. Meat has a lot of protein, and fish has both protein and iodine. It's difficult to get these nutrients from vegetables. Our second point is "the economy." Millions of men and women work in agriculture, fishing, and the food industry. If we stop eating meat, they will lose their jobs. This will cause much hardship. Our third point is "taste." Meat tastes good, and many countries use meat in their national dishes. Can you imagine Thai food without shrimp, Japanese food without sushi, American food without hamburgers, or German food without Wiener schnitzel? Eating meat is enjoyable, and an important part of our culture. We have talked about "health," "the economy," and "taste,' and have shown that we should not all be vegetarian. For these reasons, we beg to oppose...
Track 46 (p.9?')
Part 2 Listen and check your answers. Thank you, Ladies and gentlemen. Today, the resolution is: "All people should have to serve in the army." We on the negative team strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refute the affirmative's three points, then I will
give our own.
Their first point was strength. They said that if we have national service, our army will be stronger. We have two responses. It is not true that national service results in a stronger
army.
If you serve in the army for only 2 years, you don't learn enough to be a good soldier. It's better to have a professional army, where people serve between five and twenty years and receive more training. Furthermore, if the young people are forced to join and don't want to be there, they will have a poor attitude and weaken the army. Their second point was equality. They said if we have national service, citizens will share the risk of dying in a war. However, it is totally untrue that national service treats everyone equally. Rich people can always find excuses to avoid national service. During the Vietnam War, Bill Clinton avoided serving in the army by moving to England. Their third point was jobs. They believe that we can reduce unemployment by putting all young people in the army. First, this point is not necessarily true. France, for example, has national service, but also very high unemployment, especially among young people. Second, there are easier ways for the government to solve unemployment. It can always create jobs by building more roads and train
lines.
Track 45 (p.9 Part 1

Listen to a first affirmative constructive speech on the resolution, "All people should have to serve in the army." Take notes. Thank you, Ladies and gentlemen. Today, the resolution
is: "All people should have to serve in the army." We on
the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have three reasons: strength, equality, and jobs. Our first point is strength. National service will give us a stronger army. If all people serve in the army, we will always have a large body of trained, ready-to-fight soldiers in case of an emergency. In Israel, all people serve 2 or 3 years in the army. This has made Israel, which is a very small country, one of the most powerful in the world. Our second point is equality. National service promotes greater equality and fairness in a country. In a war, many soldiers are killed, causing great sadness to their family and friends. We believe that all citizens of a country should share equally in this danger. If you have a volunteer army, many people join simply because they are poor. This means that poor people die in war, but rich people do not. Our third point is jobs. National service will lower unemployment. Because most young people will be in the army, there will be fewer people looking for jobs. This will make it easier for other people to find work. Also, soldiers receive training in things like computers, driving, leadership, and so on. This training will help them find jobs after they leave the army. We have talked about strength, equality, and jobs, and have shown that all people should have to serve in the army. We beg to propose...
I have refuted their three points; now I will give the negative points. We have three points: cost, freedom, and
war.
39
Our first point is cost. National service is very expensive. Every year, one soldier costs the government over $100,000. If we multiply $100,000 by the number of young people in this country, we see that the cost is much too high. The money would better spent on hospitals and schools. Our second point is freedom. National service violates human rights. In a free country, people should be able to choose their own jobs. Our third point is war
National service will increase the chance of wars with
Track 49
p.112, 113)
The 1st Negative Constructive Speech Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today, the affirmative team is proposing that cats are better pets than dogs. We on the negative team strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refute the affirmative points, and then I will
give our own.
other countries. If we have a large army, other countries will be afraid and have to increase their armies, too. In general, when two neighboring countries have very large armies, they are more likely to use them in time of
conflict.
The affirmative talked about "cost." They said that cats are cheaper than dogs. I have three responses. First, this is not always true. Many dogs are cheaper than cats; you can even get a dog for free from an animal shelter. Second, it's not always true that dogs eat more than cats, since many dogs are quite small. Third, the price difference between dogs and cats is not significant. Dogs tend to be only a bit more expensive. They tried to prove their point by quoting from Pet Magazine, a source that I have never heard of. Have you?
The affirmative also talked about "noise." I have two
We have talked about cost, freedom, and war, and have

shown that all people should not have to serve in the army. For these reasons, we beg to oppose.
Track 47 (pp.1 12, 113)

Listen to the following debate on the resolution: "Cats are better pets than dogs." Finish flowing the debate.
Track 48 (pp.l 12, 113)

The 1st Affirmative Constructive Speech Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today, the resolution is: "Cats are better pets than dogs." We on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have three
points: cost, care, and noise.

Our first point is "cost." Cats are much cheaper than
dogs. According to Pet Magazine, the average cost for a
responses. First, that point is not true. Cats are often very noisy, particularly at night! There are at least S cats near my house, and they often spend all night screaming at each other and waking me up. Secondly, this point is not important because it's very easy to solve. You can teach a dog to be quiet. Cat teaching, however, is impossible! Now, let me present our case. We have two points: protection, and help. Our first point is "protection." Dogs protect you and ,your home. Cats don't. Imagine that you have gone to bed and have gone to sleep. And suddenly, you hear a window smash! A thief has entered your house! If you have a dog, it harks loudly and can chase the thief away. On the other hand, if you are a cat owner with no dog, well maybe the thief will steal your things, and even steal your life! Our second point is "help." Dogs often help you around the house. For example, they can bring you the newspaper, or get your slippers. If you're blind, dogs can guide you around. Cats do none of these things. Cats just eat your food and then run off and forget all about you. We have talked about protection and help, and have shown that dogs are much better pets than cats. We must oppose.
Track 50 (pp.1 12, 113)

The 2nd Affirmative Constructive Speech Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. My partner and I are proving that cats are better pets than dogs. First, I will refute the negative team's points, and then I will support my partner's. The negative's first point was "protection." They said that dogs can protect your home. But this is not important because it is easily solved. A house-alarm system is cheaper and more effective than a dirty, noisy, smelly dog. Their second point was "help." They said that dogs are more useful than cats. We have two responses. First, it is not always true that dogs are helpful. Most dogs just lie around the house all day. Well of course, some dogs do help blind people, or offer special help, but they require very expensive and special training. Second, it is not true that cats are useless. Cats catch mice, which is a far, far better thing than any dog has ever done before.
cat is $50 dollars while a dog costs $75. That's 50% more than a cat! Furthermore, cats are smaller than dogs, so they eat less food. Less food means less money. Now, our second point is "care." Cats are much easier to care for than dogs. Cats, they clean themselves and walk themselves. If you have a dog, however, you must take care of it everyday. It's a large burden. Now, our third point is "noise." Cats are much quieter than dogs. Dogs bark at cats, dogs bark at people, dogs bark at other dogs, and dogs even bark at the moon! Cats, on the other hand, meow quietly and won't disturb your neighbors. Oh! Well, we have talked about cost, care, and noise, and have clearly shown that cats, urn, are better pets than dogs. We beg to propose!
40
Well, I have refuted their two points. Now let me support my partner's points. Our first point was "cost." My partner showed that cats are cheaper than dogs, and that they cost less to feed. The negative team said that this is not always true because you can get a stray animal for free. But stray dogs are often dirty, sick, unhealthy beasts. We think you should always get a new pet from a professional breeder. This makes sure that the pet is healthy and easy to train. From a professional breeder, dogs are almost always more expensive than cats. The negative also said that the cats are just a little hit cheaper than dogs, and the difference is not significant. This is not true, Ladies and gentlemen, particularly for poor people. For poor people, even $5 a week is significant. Our second point was "care." We clearly showed that cats are much easier to keep than dogs. The negative team must have agreed because they had no answer to that p nt at all! Our third point was "noise." We explained that cats are quieter than dogs. The negative team said that this was not true since cats often make noise at night. But this is easy to solve: cats only make noise when they are outside with other cats. So, if you keep your cat inside, there is no problem. The negative team also said that you can teach a dog to be quiet. This is not true. Dogs almost always bark whenever a stranger walks by their home, no matter how many times, and in how many ways you teach them not to. We see that the negative team's points are all not true, not important, and not relevant, but our points are all strong, true, and relevant. We have shown very clearly again that cats make better pets than dogs. And we beg to propose.
Our second point is that dogs are more useful than cats. The affirmative team responded that cats catch mice. I have three responses. First, this is not a significant problem. Most people don't have problems with mice. Second, even if they do have problems with mice, they can easi solve this problem by buying cheap mousetraps. Third, it is not always true that cats catch mice, some cats are very lazy and prefer pet food. In conclusion, we have shown that dogs protect you and that dogs help you. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, please join us in opposing the resolution that cats are better pets than dogs. Thank you.
Track 52 (pp.1 12, 113)

The Negative Rebuttal Thank you ladies and gentlemen. Today's resolution is: "Cats are better pets than dogs." We on the negative team have clearly shown that this is not true. Let us look again at the important points in this debate. First, the affirmative talked about "cost." They lose this point because they have not proved cats are cheaper than dogs. Moreover, we have shown that you can get a perfectly healthy pet for free from an animal shelter. The affirmative team also talked about "noise." They said cats are quieter than dogs. They lose this point, however, since my partner gave expert evidence showing that dogs can indeed be trained to be quiet. On our side, we have two main points: "protection" and "help." Our first point was "protection." We explained that a dog can protect you from thieves. They responded by saying that house alarms are better than dogs. We win this point because they never explained why an expensive alarm system is better than a loving dog. Our second point was "help." We showed that dogs are more useful than cats. The affirmative team responded that cats catch mice. But this is not important. My partner showed that mousetraps are a cheap, easy solution. Therefore, we win this point because the affirmative team never showed that cats have any significant use. Overall, we win our key points, and we have refuted the affirmative team. Therefore, we win this debate and ask you to choose dogs instead of cats! Thank you.
Track 51 (pp.ll2, 113)

The 2,ld Negative Constructive Speech Ladies and gentlemen! Dogs are beautiful, friendly, loyal, loving animals. My partner and I strongly believe that they make much better pets than those selfish cats! Let us look at the affirmative points. They have said that cats are cheaper than dogs. But, as my partner said, this is not always true. You can get a dog for free from an animal shelter. The affirmative team doesn't want animals from the shelter. They prefer to waste lots of money on a pet from an expensive professional breeder, rather than a free animal from a shelter. Many people have adopted beautiful, healthy, and free pets from animal shelters. The affirmative also said that cats are quieter than dogs, since dogs bark at strangers. But we already explained that you can train dogs to be quiet. The book, How to Train Your Pet, by Dr. Caleb (1999), has a whole chapter on how to teach your dogs to be quiet. Let us look now at our points. Our first point was "protection." The second affirmative speaker said that this is not important because it is easily solved with an alarm system. Well, ladies and gentlemen, an alarm system is expensive, and money, ladies and gentlemen, is always important! Besides, you can't cuddle up and pet an alarm system, can you?
Track 53 (pp.1 12, 113)

The Affirmative Rebuttal Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. In this debate, the resolution has been that cats make better pets than dogs. We, on the affirmative team win this debate because we have clearly shown this to be true. The negative team loses because they have not listened to, understood, or answered our points. Let's look at the important points of this debate. The negative team had two points: "protection" and "help." They lose their "protection" point because we showed that you can always buy a house alarm. They said that house alarms are more expensive than dogs, but
this is not true. You don't have to feed a house alarm for
141
years and years and years. The negative team also loses their "help" point. They said that dogs help people, hut my partner clearly showed that this is not always true. Please remember in the 2d affirmative speech, my partner said that most dogs don't help people. Only special dogs, with special training, do. They never answered this refutation. So, this point falls. Let us look now at our p nts. Our first p nt was cost.
Our third point is "national unity." The ympics would bring South African people together. Right now, South Africa is divided by race, language, and wealth. Sports
tend to make everyone in the country proud and help

promote unity. To quote Archbishop Desmond Tutu-a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize-"Sports can be a vehicle of Africa." In conclusion, we have talked about "money," "fairness to Africa," and "national unity," and have shown that South Africa should host the next Olympic Games. For these reasons, we beg to propose. Stop here and predict the negative response
to reconcile our Rainbow Nation. We can light a torch that will bring prosperity to our country and all the people
We said that cats are cheaper than dogs. They responded

that you can get dogs for free from the animal shelter. However, my partner explained that dogs from the animal shelter are often difficult to train and are not healthy. Again, the negative never answered this response. Therefore, we win this point, too. Our second point was "care." We said that cats are easier to train than dogs. The negative team never answered this point at any time during the debate! Therefore, we win this point, too. Our third point was about noise. We said that cats are quieter than dogs. The negative team responded that cats make a lot of noise at night. We showed that this is easy to solve: keep your cat inside at night. The negative team never answered this. Instead, they showed us a book saying that you can teach a dog to be quiet. However, books about teaching don't always work. There are many math textbooks at the bookstore; it doesn't mean that everyone can learn math easily. Similarly, you cannot teach all dogs not to bark. So, in general cats are quieter than dogs, and we win this third and final point. In conclusion, we have won all three of our points, and the negative has lost both of theirs. And clearly, we have
won this debate. Thank you.
Track 56 (p.1 18)

The 1st Negative Constructive Speech Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today, we are debating the resolution, "Cape Town should host the next Olympic Games." We, on the negative team, strongly oppose this resolution. First, I will refute the affirmative points, and then I will give our own. Their first point was "money." They said that South Africa would make a lot of money from the Olympics. We have two responses. First, it is not true that the Olympics always make a profit. The 1976 games in Montreal Canada lost six hundred and thirty million dollars! The Canadian people are still paying for that even today! Second, it is probably not true that South Africa can make money off the Olympics. South Africa doesn't have enough rich people to buy tickets, or enough large companies to
sponsor events.
Ir
Track 54 (p.1 18)
Flowing a complete debate
Their second point was "fairness to Africa." They said

that Africa has never hosted the ympics, and therefore should have a turn. This is not important. This is not relevant for two reasons. First, this is not relevant because
many places have never hosted the Olympics, such as India or China, both of which have more people than all of
Africa. Second, it is not relevant because the International
Track 55 (p.1 18)

The 1st Affirmative: Constructive Speech Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Today we are debating the resolution, "Cape Town, South Africa, should host the next Olympic Games." We, on the affirmative team strongly support this resolution. We have three reasons, "money," "fairness to Africa," and "national unity." Our first point is "money." South Africa can make a lot of money from the Olympic Games which can he used to build more roads, more hospitals, and more schools for its people. In recent years, the Olympics have been very profitable. The 1996 Olympic Games made millions of dollars for the city of Atlanta, as the 1992 Games did for Barcelona. Our second point is "fairness to Africa." Africa is the only continent that has never hosted the Olympic Games, and it too should have a chance. Europe has hosted the Olympics 27 times, North America, 12 times, Asia, 4 times, Australia twice, and Latin America, once. Africa, which the world so often ignores, should have a turn.
142
Olympic Committee chooses the host by deciding who

will host the best Olympic games, not who hasn't had a turn yet. Their third point was "national unity." They said that the ympic Games would bring South Africans together. This is clearly not true for two reasons. First, it is nor true that all South Africans will support the ympics. Probably many people, particularly the poor people, will be angry when they see the government wasting money on stadiums and swimming pools instead of building much needed schools, hospitals, libraries, roads, and health programs for the poor. Second, it is not true that the ympic Games will benefit all people of South Africa. It will only help people in Cape Town. People who live outside Cape lown will be very angry and feel ignored. Clearly, ladies and gentlemen, an ympics hosted by South Africa will further divide the country, not unify it. I have refuted the affirmative points, now I will give ours. We have two: "cost" and "other cities."
Our first point is "cost." We believe that the Olympics will cost South Africa too much money. To host the ympics, the government will have to build many stadiums and swimming pools. The total cost may come to millions of dollars. South Africa is a poor country, and the money should be used to build roads, hospitals, and schools, not Olympic sized swimming pools! Our second point is "other cities." There are other cities better able to host the Olympics. For example, Toronto, Canada already has many beautiful stadiums and a lot of experience hosting sporting events. It also has many large companies able to act as sponsors. Beijing is another city that could host the ympics better than Cape Town. In conclusion, we have talked about "cost," and "other cities," and have shown that Cape Town should not host the next ympic Games. We must oppose!
also never hosted the Games. But this is not relevant. India
Track 57 (p.1 19)

The 2nd Affirmative Constructive Speech Ladies and gentlemen, hosting the ympics would have great benefits in South Africa, Africa, and the rest of the world, which is why we must support this resolution
and China are countries, while Africa is a continent. The negative team also said that giving new countries a chance to host the Games is not important. We strongly disagree! The true Olympic spirit is about promoting international communication and understanding. Africa is an important part of the world community and should be given the chance to host this important world event. Our third point was "national unity." We explained that the ympics would bring pride and unity to all South Africans. The negative responded that the Olympic Games will anger poor people, as well as people outside of Cape Town. This is totally not true! We know from experience that hosting the Olympics makes an entire country proud. Also, the Olympics will attract more tourists and more money to all of South Africa. In conclusion, we have talked about "money," "fairness to Africa," and "national unity," and have clearly shown that South Africa would benefit from hosting the Olympic Games. We strongly beg to propose. Thank you.
Track 58 (p.l 20)

The 2" Negative Constructive Speech Ladies and gentlemen, hosting the Olympics would be a big waste of time and a bigger waste of money for the people of South Africa. We strongly oppose this resolution. First I will refute the affirmative points, then I will support my partner's. Their first point was "money." They said that no ympics has lost money in the last 20 years. Well, ladies and gentlemen, in the last 20 years there have only been five Olympics! Five is not a significant number. It is a very, very small sample size of all the Olympic Games. They also said that the Olympics will have international sponsors. That is true, but again it is insignificant! The amount of international sponsorship is much, much less than the amount of money required from the host country. Their second point was "fairness to Africa." They said
that Africa is a continent and China and India are
today.
Let me first refute the negative team's points, and then I will support my partner's. Their first point was "cost." They said that the ympics would cost South Africa a lot of money. We have two responses. First, it is not true that preparing for the Olympics will be expensive for South Africa. Many people in South Africa don't have jobs, so labor is very, very cheap. This will keep costs down. Second, the problem of cost is easy to solve, since most of the money will come from sponsors all over the world. The South African people will not have to spend much money preparing for the Games. Their second point was "other cities." They said that other cities like Toronto or Beijing would be better Olympic hosts because they have more experience and money. We have two responses. First, experience is not important. Most ympic cities are first time hosts, and Cape Town has experience hosting large African sporting events. Second, it is not important that Toronto has lots of money. Toronto is a very expensive city compared to Cape Town, so its money will not buy as much. I have refuted their points, now let me support our points. Our first point was "money." We showed that the Olympics could make a lot of money for the South African people. The negative team responded that the ympics could lose money. This is not necessarily true. Every Olympics over the past 20 years has made a profit. We have learned from Montreal's mistakes. Also, the negative team said that South Africa doesn't have rich companies to sponsor the Games or rich people to pay for tickets. This is not important. Most Olympic sponsors are international companies, and many rich people will travel to South
Africa to see the Games.
countries. This is totally irrelevant! China has more people than all of Africa. Just because Africa has more space doesn't mean it should get the Olympic Games. Their third point was about "national unity." They said that the past has shown that the Olympics make a country proud. We think that South African people would be much more proud if money was used to improve education and to improve health care. My partner has explained that poor people will feel angry if the government spends lots of money on sports stadiums. They have not answered this point. I have refuted the affirmative points. Let me now give our
p nts.
Our second point was "fairness to Africa." We explained that Africa should have a chance to host the ympics. The negative team responded that India and China have
Our first point was "cost." They said that in South Africa labor is cheap. This may be true, hut it is not important. Building materials are very expensive, and the government will have to borrow money at high interest rates. So, as we said before, the ympic Games will be expensive for South Africa.
143
Our second point was "other cities." Everything the affirmative said about Cape Town can also be said about Beijing, plus, Beijing has more money, more sports stadiums, and more and better roads. We have shown again, ladies and gentlemen, that the South African government should not waste its money on playing sports! We must oppose!
Track 60 (p.1 22)

The Affirmative Rebuttal
Track 5 p.121)
The Negative Rebuttal Thank you ladies and gentlemen. We have been debating the resolution "Cape Town should hold the next Olympic Games," and we have clearly shown that this is not true. Let's look at the major points of this debate. The affirmative points were "money," "fairness to Africa," and "national unity." They lose the point about money because they never showed how Cape Town would make money from the Olympics. The examples that they gave, such as Atlanta, are not relevant. These are rich cities from rich countries with rich people and rich companies. They lose their point about fairness to Africa because they never refuted our example of China. They said that the continent of Africa has never hosted the Olympics. So what? That is totally irrelevant! Africa is a big piece of land surrounded by water. China is a big piece of land surrounded by more land and water. They lose their point about national unity because they never explained why poor people who don't have enough food to eat would enjoy new sports stadiums in their neighborhoods. Our most important p nt was "cost." We win this p nt because they never gave any evidence that international companies would give enough money to pay for the Olympics. Without international sponsorship, the South African government will have to borrow money at very high interest rates. This is a big cost to the country. We win this debate because the most important point was money. We have clearly won this point. Therefore, we strongly oppose today's resolution.
Ladies and gentlemen! Today we have been debating the resolution, "Cape Town should host the next Olympic Games," and we have clearly shown this to be true. Let's look at the major points of this debate. The negative points were "cost," and "other cities." In the negative's first point about cost, they said that South Africa has high interest rates and is expensive. Of course it will cost money to prepare for the Olympics. However, the Olympics will also bring in lots of money. The negative loses this point because they've never shown why the cost would be greater than the income. We, on the other hand, have shown that the last 5 ympics have made a profit. Their second point was other cities. The negative team talked a little bit about Beijing and a little bit about Toronto but didn't make a clear organized case for either city. They didn't even talk about this in their rebuttal! So, they lose this point because they did not develop it. Our main points were "money," and "fairness." As I said before, we win the point about money because we have offered evidence from the last five Olympics. The Olympics will bring in lots of money to South African people and improve their lives. We also talked about fairness to Africa. The Olympics will bring honor and respect to the entire continent. The negative has never denied this. Africa deserves greater respect and recognition. Therefore, we win this point, also. The Olympic Games will give South Africa money, jobs, and world recognition. Clearly, Cape Town should host this great event. We strongly propose!
144
Refuting
'P .5 C 1 5.
80
Source
Their rst point was money.
In Unit 5, you learned the five steps for stating a refutation. Refuting a source is very similar.
Read the five steps below for refuting a source. Read the example refutation on the left.
Then, use the steps to make your own ref utations.
` 2
SIGNPOST Their first point was...
3 NEGATION
4 HY
5. RATIONALE They gave no source for... They gave no date for the source on... The source for... is outdated. They didn't explain how the source reached th
conclusion.
. .
REPHRASE They said that... because...
They said that cats are

cheaper than dogs because Dr. Silvercat said so.
This is not necessarily true.
This is not necessarily

true.
The evidence they gave is very questionable. Their evidence was not valid.
The evidence they gave is very questionable.
They didn't explain why Dr. Silvercat is an

expert in this area.
They gave no explanation for why... Not enough data was collected. Their study didn't collect data properly.
They didn't explain why the source is an expert in
this area. Their source is not an expert in this area because... The source is biased. Their expert is biased.
Asking Questions
Most debates have a question and answer session between speeches where the debaters can question the other team. Here are six files for questioning supports.
5. 'P .5 U C 1
0 If there is no source given
What is the source for that information? Where did that information come from? Is there a source for that information?
0 If there is no explanation given What is the reason for the source's conclusion that . . .
Why does the source believe this?
If there is no date given
What is the date for that source? How recent is that source?
If the statist ic is questionable What method was used to collect this data?
Was enough data collected?
O If the source's expertise is questionable
Does the source have enough experience to be called an "expert" in this area?
What is the source's experience in this area?
If the source might be biased
Does the source benefit financially if people believe this information? Isn't that source biased?
79
'
PAIRWORK Partner B looks at this page, Partner A looks at the previous page. Partner
A starts by reading one of the supports against nuclear power. Partner B listens and
chooses the best question for challenging the support. Partner B then reads the question
while Partner A checks to see if it is correct. Continue until al- six supports have been
o ' s * C . n i 5
82
correctly questioned, then switch roles.
Questions
What is the date for that source? Jl

Does the source have enough knowledge -l
-1
about: nuclear power to be called an
Was enough data collected? How many people did you ask?
What is the reason for the source's conclusion that nuclear power is dangerous?
;"'
lexpert:
-L

1 G s e 1
Isn't that source biased?
what is the source for that intormatiori' -l
Supports Against Abortion

Abortion is bad because a child inside the
mother is a living, breathing human being with a fully functioning heart and brain.
Ans Source?
According to The Phizzer Drug Company, abortion should be banned because there are much better methods of birth
control available.
Arrs Bios
Dr. Shin, Director of the American Medical Society, wrote that "Abortion
is murder...." (1997).
Ans: Reason?
Four out of five women we interviewed said that they were against abortion.
Ass: Dato5
IC I According to Professor PatI Thanaton,
1_.l_1 i-'oor[iori Sn URU DCl 1 C oanncu ec.ause I a cniiu insiue tne morner can reei pain. Abortion is murder." (The New Times,
Ans: Expert?
L I According to The Journal of the American

abortion is dangerous for the mother and often results in her death.
Ans: Data?
January 25, 1999)
m
Question Supports
PAIRWORK Partner A looks at this page, Partner B looks at the next page. Partner A
i n Su Un f i . 6^hl e l n P Pos r.
starts by reading one of the supports against nuclear power. Partner B listens and chooses the best question for challenging the support. Partner B then reads the question while Partner A checks to see if it is correct. Continue unti- al- six supports have been correctly
questioned, then switch roles.
Supports Against Nuclear Energy

^
Every year millions of people die from radiation poisoning.
Anrn Source2
According to the Clam Oil Company, nuclear power stations are never safe because of the possibility of computer
failures.
Aes: Bias?
According to the magazine, Scin c Canadian, nuclear power plants can leak radiation and therefore are not safe.
Arss: Date?
television cooking show, Cook for Me, said on his show just last week that nuclear power is bad because it causes
cancer. Ann Experf)
---1
Chef Pierre, the famous chef from the
,.....-.,....
Professor Chen of the ULMC Biology Department, wrote in the May 1998 issue of Natural Life that "Nuclear power is dangerous."
Ans: Reason?
Everyone thinks nuclear power is a bad thing. According to a survey I took at a party last New Year's Eve every person I asked said that nuclear power was a bad thing because of radiation leaks.
Questions
Does the source benefit financially if people believe this information?
What method was used to collect this

data?
Is there a source for that information?
reason for this belief?
What is the source's experience?

What
subject is the source a professor of?
How recent is that source?
81

DD R

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

DD R

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

SCOVER DEBATE

Basic Skills for Supporting and Refuting Opinions

Produced and published by: Language Solutions Incorporated

ISBN 978-89-8446-5 1 7-6

This book is dedicated to:

anuary 6, 1958 . June 21, 1999

Brian effrey Moss

User Friendly Format

Topics: From the Silly to the Sublime

IJ'"' r:TrT n L,l I I r

Debate Terms Debate in the News Opinions in the News

Explaining Your Opinion

Gimme one reason...

nion Brainstorming Reasons

Supporting Your Opinion

Supporting your Opinion Types of Support $ Giving Supports

One, Two, Three

Organizing Your Opinion

Contr& L cictice Strip Speech

Present your House

Stating a Refutation Point Refutation

Making Refutations Tennis Debate

Organizing Your Refutation

Organ`IZing your Refutati n

Micr Organization for the 1 1 C

ractice " ition

Debate Formats Responding to Attacks The Rebuttal

Rebuttal Speeches Flowing a Debate

Flow a Complete Debate

In Unit 1, we prepare the roof of the house.

In unit 2, we support the roof with strong pillars and walls.

Then, in Unit 3, we build

Cats Make Better Pets Than

Can walk themselves

In Units 5, 6, 7, we learn how to attack the other

3Cats Make Better Pets Than Dogs

Finally, in Units 8 and 9,

and enjoy debate!

Can walk themselves

1. Math is the most important subject!

2. The government should lower taxes!

3. Cats are better pets than dogs!

4. Eating fast food is not healthy!

Run to the Corner Game

Opinions of Va-ue, Policy, & Fact

cats are better pets than dogs.

there will be an earthquake in Tokyo next year.

I'm certain that

swimming is better exercise than walking.

the government should lower taxes.

Soccer is more fun than

respond. Check to see if Partner

A: I 'm certain that dogs are better pets than cats.

B: I think so too. It is really nice to stay home.

A: I think that smoking cigarettes is dirty.

B: Me too! I would never even want to start.

the two given for each opinion. Your partner wi

tel- you if you chose the correct

ink so. Rainforests are very important for the future.

B: Listen to Person B's opinion and respond.

B: Listen to Person B's opinion and respond.

I think that I believe that

I agree (that...) (with...)