[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
speech must outline a clear value system to be applied in the
analysis. A debater dealing with a policy question must present a
compelling need or problem area, and often will indicate the plan
to solve that need.
Absolute clarity is the aim of the rst speaker. Ordinarily, the
audience can get a clear picture of the whole afrmative case if
the speaker outlines for them the issues and arguments to be dis-
cussed and identies any reserved until the second afrmative. A
clear summary at the end of this speech that reviews the outline
of the afrmative case as a whole will add emphasis to the case
and probably prevent confusion later on.
In chapter 2 we mentioned a possibl e time budget for this
speech. The exact time apportionment may differ from speaker
to speaker, but the important factor is that you plan each minute
of the speech. Take some time now to review that time suggestion
Speakers Duties 89
as you begin to write your rst afrmative constructive. Remem-
ber that you need an introduction and denition of key terms of
the proposition; a statement of the afrmative philosophy, includ-
ing a value criterion if you are debating a value-oriented topic; an
outline preview of the entire afrmative case, indicating which
topics will be covered by your partner; presentation of the afr-
mative case, including supporting arguments; and a nal sum-
mary of the entire case. Ideally, even if you will not be the rst
afrmative speaker but will take on the duties of the second af-
rmative, or member of government, you should still be involved
in the writing of the rst speech. You will have to defend it in the
second position, so you must be completely familiar with its de-
velopment and contents. Two team members working together
can produce a document that both can then support.
First Negative, or Leader of Opposition Constructive
The duties in this speech are two: rst, to state the opposition or
negative s philosophy toward the proposition; and, second, to in-
dicate the manner in which the negative will attempt to refute the
afrmative s case.
In some respects, the rst negative constructive is the most
important speech in the entire debate. We saw earlier that the
negative team must decide on its method of attack before the de-
bate. It can merely refute whatever the afrmative says. It can at-
tack the value system or offer an alternative. It can attack the need
argument or the plan; offer its own substitute value system or so-
lution, admitting a problem with the one in the status quo; or
both. But once the rst negative indicates which direction the
team will take, the negative must follow through. They cannot
come back in a later speech with another approach without greatly
weakening their position.
Thus, the rst negative speaker indicates the areas of clash.
The afrmative speakers, after all, must create a belief in the truth
of a proposition, using a number of subpropositions or issues at
each step. Each of these assertions is like a link in a chain; if any
one of them is broken, the chain ceases to exist. The negative usu-
ally chooses, therefore, to attack the weakest links in the chain of
argument to clash with those issues it feels best able to refute. A
90 Speakers Duties
thoughtful afrmative will listen carefully to the rst negative
speech to determine the course of the negative attack and thus
prepare its defenses.
Some negative teams will try to devote this entire speech to
pure refutation, hoping to reserve their constructive arguments
for their second speech, and thus outwit the afrmative by intro-
ducing constructive arguments, countervalues, or even counter-
plans late in the debate. Such strategy is of doubtful value, since
essentially it avoids the real issues of the debate. Moreover, a
practical time disadvantage is that the second negative speaker
then has to handle refutation and counterrefutation while trying
to squeeze the entire constructive argument into half a speech.
The rst negative speaker also has the last opportunity to ac-
cept or reject the denitions offered by the afrmative. Silence at
this point is assent. Some speakers say explicitly that they accept
the denitions, and we prefer this approach to minimize confu-
sion, but it is assumed that they are accepted unless otherwise
noted. The afrmative has a right, logically, to make sure that
both its opponents and the audience understand clearly what the
proposition means hence the denition of troublesome terms.
But the afrmative is obliged to support the entire proposition as
its minimal duty, and the negative should object to denitions
that substantially lessen or alter the meaning of the proposition
for debate. The key question in respect to denition, then, be-
comes Does the afrmative or government dene the proposi-
tion in a reasonable manner, or does it attempt to change it in an
unreasonable manner? Unless a signicant change is made in a
denition, the negative opposition should not quibble over it.
The rst negative speech and all speeches that follow
should at least acknowledge at the outset what the preceding
speaker has said. If the rst negative has no intention of spending
time immediately on direct refutation of the rst afrmative, it
would be wise to preview for the audience the areas to be covered
in the speech. In fact, a good initial preview is helpful in each
speech. Without such an introduction, the audience may reach
one of two conclusions: the speaker has failed to understand the
opponents arguments; or worse, the speaker is unable to reply to
them. In the same way, any important material discussed in cross-
Speakers Duties 91
examination or introduced in a point of information should be
included with a reference to the fact that it comes from those pe-
riods.
Both negative speakers should make clear to the audience that
the burden of proof for the proposition lies with the afrmative.
The negative ought to make an initial analysis of the proposition
in order to do this. Without such explicit analysis, the afrmative
may (and many afrmative speakers do) get by with supporting
a much lighter burden of proof than is their responsibility.
As the debate increases in complexity, laying out precise time
budgets for the speeches becomes increasingly difcult. Start
with the suggestions presented earlier, and as you become pro-
cient in talking about arguments and issues, you will begin to
make adaptations that suit you and the particular debate. Almost
always, you will need an introduction, discussion of denitions,
acknowledgement of afrmative arguments (and refutation if de-
sired), and analysis of the proposition from the negative view
the negative or opposition philosophy, presentation of a negative
case with supporting arguments, and a summary of both cases to
this point in the debate.
Second Afrmative, or Member of Government Constructive
The major issues of the debate have probably been stated by the
time the second afrmative, or member, rises to speak. The pri-
mary duties therefore will include reafrming the afrmative
point of view and concluding the case for the team.
The negative speaker has no doubt raised some objections,
which the afrmative speaker must at least acknowledge. If de-
sired, these objections can be addressed directly (and briey) at
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]