Elements of Debating - LightNovelsOnl.com
You're reading novel online at LightNovelsOnl.com. Please use the follow button to get notifications about your favorite novels and its latest chapters so you can come back anytime and won't miss anything.
A. It is not applicable to this question, for:
1. The plan at Shortridge is not identical with the proposed plan, for:
(1) Shortridge has not entirely abolished inter contests, for:
a) _School Review_, October, 1911.
2. Conditions in Shortridge differ from those in the high schools of Northern Illinois, for:
(1) Faculty of that school has unusual efficiency in coaching, for:
a) Extract from letter of princ.i.p.al.
(2) Larger number of students, for:
a) Extract from letter of princ.i.p.al.
CONCLUSION
Since there is no opportunity for serious abuse arising from contests between schools, and since the adoption of contests within the schools alone would lessen the democracy of contests as a form of education, and since the proposed plan is impracticable in theory and has never been put into successful operation, the negative concludes that the subst.i.tution of intra for inter contests is not desirable in the high schools of Northern Illinois.
From these ill.u.s.trative briefs we can draw:
RULES FOR BRIEFING
The introduction should contain only such material as both sides will admit, or, as you can show, should reasonably admit, from the phrasing of the proposition.
Scrupulous care should be used in the numbering and lettering of all statements and substatements.
Each issue should be a logical reason for the truth of the proposition.
Each substatement should be a logical reason for the issue or statement that it supports.
Each issue in the proof and each statement that has supporting statements should be followed by the word "for."
Each reason given in support of the issues and each subreason should be no more than a simple, complete, declarative sentence.
The word "for" should never appear as a connective between a statement and substatement in the introduction.
The words "hence" and "therefore" should never appear in the proof of the brief, but one should be able to read _up_ through the brief and by subst.i.tuting the word "therefore" for the word "for" in each case, arrive at the proposition as a conclusion.
SUGGESTED EXERCISES
1. Turn to Exercise 1, in Lesson V, and carefully brief the selection from Burke.
2. Is the following extract from a high-school student's brief correct in form? Criticize it in regard to arrangement of ideas, and correct it so far as is possible without using new material.
SOCCER FOOTBALL SHOULD BE ADOPTED IN THE "A" HIGH SCHOOL AS A REGULAR BRANCH OF ATHLETIC SPORT
INTRODUCTION
I. Recent popularity of soccer.
1. In England.
2. In America.
II. Soccer a healthful game, for:
1. Develops lungs.
2. Develops all the muscles.
III. Issues.
1. Soccer is a beneficial game.
2. Would the students of "A" support soccer as a regular sport?
PROOF
I. Soccer is a beneficial sport, for:
1. It requires much running, kicking, and dodging, both in offensive and defensive playing, therefore--
(1) It develops muscles.
(2) It develops lungs.
2. It is played out of doors, therefore
(1) It develops lungs.
II. Students of "A" would support soccer as a regular sport, for:
1. Who has ever heard of students who would not support soccer, baseball, basket-ball, and all other exciting games?
3. The following is the conclusion of an argument by Edmund Burke in which the speaker maintained that Warren Hastings should be impeached by the House of Commons. If it had been preceded by a clear "introduction" and convincing "proof," do you think that it would have made an effective "conclusion"?
Therefore, it is with confidence that, ordered by the Commons:
I impeach Warren Hastings, Esquire, of high crimes and misdemeanors.
I impeach him in the name of the Commons of Great Britain, in Parliament a.s.sembled, whose parliamentary trust he has betrayed.
I impeach him in the name of all the Commons of Great Britain, whose national character he has dishonored.