Tips for Refutation
Debate, like any sport, is a game that requires a balance of offense and defense. However, the way that offense and defense functions is different than what you may expect. In debate, your opponent’s arguments are like points they are trying to score, and your job is to block their points and score your own. The best way to meet this burden of rejoinderGeneral Definition: In general, the negative responsibility to clash with the affirmative case. More specifically, any time a team establishes a proposition of fact -- a claim that something is or isn't true -- the other team has a burden of rejoinder to clash with that claim. Public Forum: see general definition. World Schools Debate: see general definition. British Parliamentary: More and beat your opponent on the flow is as easy as 1-2-3.
Tips for Refutation
Provide Defense
A common misconception about defense in debate is the assumption that defense simply means you are “defending your own arguments”, ie extending your own arguments and defending them, which is correct, in a sense. However, it is better to think of defense as arguments that swat away your opponent’s arguments and prevent them from scoring a point. Think of your opponent’s argument like a mosquito; defensive arguments are the flyswatter swings that swat the mosquitoes [their arguments] away from you so they don’t get your blood [score a point]. Some examples of defensive arguments are:
- “There are alternate causes for these problems”
- “This argument is non-unique”
- “This doesn’t happen that often”
- “This is not true in all cases”
For defensive arguments, you are trying to poke holes in your opponent’s logic and explain why your opponent’s arguments don’t stand.
Provide Offense
Offense gives the judge a reason to vote for you. Defensive argumentation is reactive- it is what you say in response to an opponent to tear down the credibility of their arguments. Offensive argumentation, on the other hand, is what is used to create contentions; these are arguments that give weight to your side of the debate. Some examples of offensive arguments are:
- “My case solves the problems in your case”
- “You make the impacts worse”
- “My case outweighs”
Let’s analyze some refutationGeneral Definition: Direct responses to an opponent’s argument. See also “Clash”.
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More on a topicGeneral Definition: The central premise being debated, often called the "Motion" or "Resolution". • Public Forum: Not a common phrase in PF, where "Resolution" is used instead. • World Schools Debate: Not a common phrase in WSD, where "Motion" is used instead. • British Parliamentary: Not a common phrase in BP, where "Motion" is used instead.. • Canadian National Debate More using offense and defense.
If we look at the motionGeneral Definition: The topic or subject offered to debate. Motions are written as statements that create clear affirmative and negative ground, or positions. See also "Resolution".
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More “This house would ban homework’, propositionGeneral Definition: The side supporting the motion in a debate.
• Public Forum: Proposition is not a common phrase in PF, where "Pro" or "Affirmative" are used instead.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More could say that “homework causes stress”.
In response, the opposition could say:
- Not all students have a lot of homework that causes them stress. And even if they do have a lot of homework, it is their responsibility to get it done and manage their time wisely [defensive].
- However, if students do their homework and figure out how to manage their time in the short term, it can benefit them in the long run. For example, when they get to college, they will be better equipped to deal with the workload [offensive].
Notice how the first argument just swats away the opponents claimGeneral Definition: The main point or central thesis of an argument; what the debater seeks to prove true. Public Forum: see general definition.
World Schools Debate: see general definition.
British Parliamentary: see general definition.
Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More and says “not all” students have a lot of homework. This claimGeneral Definition: The main point or central thesis of an argument; what the debater seeks to prove true. Public Forum: see general definition.
World Schools Debate: see general definition.
British Parliamentary: see general definition.
Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More manages to mitigate the scopeGeneral Definition: Who or what is affected by an impact. Scope answers the question, "How many are affected?"
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More of the opponents arguments, but it does not completely take out the argument or give a reason why homework is good. What about the students who do have a lot of homework? Even if there are some that do not struggle with stress from homework, some do- which means there are still people that the propositionGeneral Definition: The side supporting the motion in a debate.
• Public Forum: Proposition is not a common phrase in PF, where "Pro" or "Affirmative" are used instead.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More team would benefit if we banned homework.
Now take a look at the second argument. This argument takes the logic of the opposition team and uses it to their benefit. By saying that stress from homework in the short term is good because of long-term benefit, team propositionGeneral Definition: The side supporting the motion in a debate.
• Public Forum: Proposition is not a common phrase in PF, where "Pro" or "Affirmative" are used instead.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More can now use the argument to prove why homework is beneficial and should not be banned.
Weigh the Argument
This last step is a bonus; as long as you provide offense and defense, any extra weighing just pushes the point home. You can use any weighing mechanismGeneral Definition: The standards by which a judge evaluates the impacts of a debate, including explicit means of comparison like magnitude/scope, probability/likelihood, or timeframe. See also "Impact Weighing". • Public Forum: In PF, students may explicitly or implicitly state their weighing mechanisms, including magnitude/scope, probability/likelihood, and timeframe. • World Schools Debate: In WSD, explicitly stating weighing mechanisms is not common; More for refutationGeneral Definition: Direct responses to an opponent’s argument. See also “Clash”.
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More weighing.
For the example above, we might say:
“The long term benefits of homework outweigh the short term harms due to the timeframe- you will gain long term skills from homework, while stress is short term and motivates better habits.”
By weighing the arguments in refutationGeneral Definition: Direct responses to an opponent’s argument. See also “Clash”.
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More, you can give the judge a clear view of how your arguments interact with your opponent’s arguments.
Practicing full refutationGeneral Definition: Direct responses to an opponent’s argument. See also “Clash”.
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More with these three steps will bring your arguments to the next level. Remember, debate is a game; it is not about who is right and who is wrong- it is about who is more strategic. However, in order to be strategic enough to pull off full refutationGeneral Definition: Direct responses to an opponent’s argument. See also “Clash”.
• Public Forum: see general definition.
• World Schools Debate: see general definition.
• British Parliamentary: see general definition.
• Canadian National Debate Format: see general definition.
More, you also need an organized gameboard.
Vancouver Debate Academy
“VDA’s mission is to train students to think critically about their world and advocate successfully for themselves and their communities. Through the collective efforts of our expert coaches, talented students, and experienced team, VDA students have broken several debate records in Canada in the past six years.
