Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

What To Do?

GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:23:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
When the opening arguments your opponent presents fill up all the space, so that you would use up all your space rebutting them, do you just ignore his arguments for a while and post your opening ones instead?

It seems to make sense, but what if his opening refutes your opening? Then you would have to rebut his opening for your opening to make any sense...
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 5,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 7:25:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:23:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
When the opening arguments your opponent presents fill up all the space, so that you would use up all your space rebutting them, do you just ignore his arguments for a while and post your opening ones instead?

It seems to make sense, but what if his opening refutes your opening? Then you would have to rebut his opening for your opening to make any sense...

If he has BoP, just rebut. If it's shared, just give a brief summary of your arguments and rebut his major ones, and if there's enough space work on your opening statement more.
#UnbanTheMadman

#StandWithBossy

#BetOnThett

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16

https://docs.google.com...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 8:27:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 7:25:42 PM, SeventhProfessor wrote:
At 2/17/2014 7:23:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
When the opening arguments your opponent presents fill up all the space, so that you would use up all your space rebutting them, do you just ignore his arguments for a while and post your opening ones instead?

It seems to make sense, but what if his opening refutes your opening? Then you would have to rebut his opening for your opening to make any sense...

If he has BoP, just rebut. If it's shared, just give a brief summary of your arguments and rebut his major ones, and if there's enough space work on your opening statement more.

Shared BoP, and I ignored many arguments that were based on Wiki yet I STILL didn't have any room left. Oh well.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Raisor
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 9:11:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It depends on the style, topic and format of the debate. There are a few things you can do:

1) Critically evaluate if arguments have weak points or can be adequately refuted by addressing only part of the argument. E.g. if opponent has an argument that depends on a chain of reasoning, only attack one link in the chain unless you have extra space.

2) Prioritize arguments- if one of your opponents arguments is substantially weaker you may be able to ignore it until the next round. Or you can drop the argument but try and weigh it against other arguments. Weighing arguments unfortunately doesn't work well on DDO because people tend to just vote on whatever aspect of the debate resonates the most with their own opinion, regardless of how it is framed in round, but it is an available tactic.

3) You can try using framework arguments to argue that certain classes of argument are less important or irrelevant. E.g. if your opponent is arguing we shouldn't torture on ethical ground, argue that ethical concerns aren't relevant to security considerations or something. This can be more efficient than addressing the argument at hand.

4) Use strategies that capture your opponents arguments. For example in one of my debates my opponent said we should repeal the ADA, and my counterargument was that we should amend the ADA to address the problem Pro identified rather than repealing it. Many arguments have ways for you to negate the Resolution without refuting all of your opponents points.

5) Sort of similar to 1), but see if their are assumptions your opponent makes vulnerable to criticism. For example if Pro's entire case is based on assumptions of International Realism, you can argue that this is bad methodology and so all of Pro's arguments are flawed.

6) Group similar arguments- make sure you arent making the same argument multiple times. This also goes with 3-5). Identifying common aspects of different arguments means you can address them with only one argument.

These are just some things you can do. Its all about efficiency.