Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of Lincoln-Douglas Debate
The History of Lincoln Douglas Debate
-The format was named after the 1858 debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas because their debates focused on slavery and the morals, values, and logic behind slavery.
What a decision SHOULD be based on...
What a decision should be based on.
1. Burden of proof – Which debater has proven his/her side of the resolution more valid as a general principle by the end of the round? No debater can realistically be expected to prove complete validity or invalidity of the resolution. A judge should prefer quality and depth of argumentation to mere quantity of argumentation. A judge should base the decision on which debater more effectively resolved the central questions of the resolution rather than on insignificant dropped arguments.
2. Value structure – Which debater better established a clear and cohesive relationship between the argumentation and the value structure?
3. Argumentation – Which debater better presented his/her arguments with logical reasoning using appropriate support? Which debater best utilized cross-examination to clarify, challenge, or advance arguments?
4. Resolutionality –Which debater best addressed the central questions of the resolution?
5. Clash – Which debater best showed the ability to both attack his/her opponent’s case and to defend his/her own?
6. Delivery – Which debater communicated in a more persuasive, clear, and professional manner?
What it should NOT be based on.....
What a decision should not be based on.
1. Personal bias – A judge’s preference for a side of the resolution or a topic bias should not enter into the decision. A judge must decide the round based on the arguments presented in that round. Objectivity is the primary responsibility of any judge.
2. Partiality – The judge should not be influenced by the reputation of or relationship with the debaters, schools, or coaches. If a situation arises where impartiality is in doubt, the judge has the responsibility to report this potential conflict of interest to the tab room.
3. New arguments introduced in rebuttals– The judges shall disregard new arguments introduced in the rebuttals. This does not include the introduction of new evidence in support of points already advanced or the answering of arguments introduced by opponents.
1. It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of many innocent people.
- focuses on values & reasoning to support general principles
- debate over what things should be like instead of how things actually are
- arguing from the perspective of a specific value
- not presenting specific plans or counterplans in order to prove a point
- may offer generalized practical examples to illustrate the general principle to guide decisions
Rodney Edwards Amani Trice Yannik Marazia Katherine Delafave Kacey Winston
2. The abuse of illegal drugs ought to be treated as a matter of public health not criminal justice.
3. It is morally permissible for victims to use deadly force as a deliberate response to repeated domestic violence.
What does a Lincoln Douglas debate entail?