辩论干货学习
Public Forum Debates
HOW TO WRITE
A PUBLIC FORUM DEBATE CASE
如何撰写一篇公共论坛式辩论的案例文稿
和大部分论文一样,文章开篇第一句都应该是诱人的钓钩(hook),或是捕获人们的注意力。这个原则,在辩论案例中同样适用。有的人引用名人名言(quotes)作为其介绍部分,有的人则运用一个非常简短的故事。根本原则就是,任何可以抓取人们注意力的东西,都可以被用做介绍部分。
The introduction is completely optional. If you have questions about whether to include this or not, ask your coach.
介绍部分完全是可选的。如果你的裁判之前有过辩论经验,大多数情况下,他们会希望你跳过介绍部分,直奔下个主题;然而,当你遇到的是经验不多的裁判,他们可能觉得介绍能让你的发言更有说服力。如果你对发言是不是要包含介绍部分存有疑问,先问问你的教练。

Resolution and Stance
辩题和立场在这个部分,你只是想向裁判阐明你正在辩论什么,以及你站在哪里一边。
Usually debaters simply say, “we Affirm or Negative the resolution resolved…” And then they read the resolution.
通常辩手们都简述说:“我们认同或否认这个命题……”跟着然后他们读一遍辩题。你可能也注意到几乎每一个辩手都会如炮制法地这么做。

这一部分,你将定义辩题中的某些个词汇。
Generally people say, “This word” defined by “Insert Source” means this.
通常人们都说:“这个词汇”在“某某某(插入来源)”定义里的意思是……
有些辩论队喜欢把辩题中的几乎每个词汇都定义一遍,有些则倾向于啥都不去定义。我将通过3个案例来说明在哪些地方做定义是必要的。
去澄清你认为裁判可能不知道的某个特定词汇或短语的意思。
To clarify if you think the judge doesn’t know what a particular word or phrase means.
当你觉得某个词汇或短语将存在矛盾或巨大争议。例如,假设辩题是“中国对美国的威胁大过俄罗斯。”我会想定义什么是威胁,因为这将可能是辩论中很大一部分。
When you suspect there will be a conflict or large debate around a certain word or phrase. For example if the resolution said, “China is a bigger threat to the United States than Russia.” I may want to define what a threat is because that will likely be a large portion of the debate.
当你想运用一个定义把辩题引导向对你有利的方向。就用刚刚那个例子,我可能会找到一个关于“更大威胁”的定义,并定义它意味着更多破坏性武器。并且在我的陈述中,我会说“俄罗斯拥有比中国多得多的核武,故而他们才是更大的威胁。”通过定义“更大威胁”,给自己创造了一个优势。
When you want to utilize a definition to swing the resolution in your favor. Using the last example, I might find a definition that creates “bigger threat” to mean more destructive weapons. And then later in my case I could say, “Russia has a lot more nukes than China does, therefore they are the bigger threat.” By defining bigger threat, I gave myself an advantage.

构架是告诉裁判如何决定这轮辩论的胜者。
The framework tells the judge how the winner of the round should be decided.
你会说“如果成本超过了收益,你应该投反对票,反之亦然。”这就是最常用的构架之一。
You might say, “If the costs outweigh the benefits you should vote negative or visa versa.” This is one of the most common frameworks.
运用我们之前的案例,你可以说“如果我们——反方,能够证明俄罗斯比中国拥有更多破坏性武器,那么你应该投票给反方。”
Utilizing our previous example you might say, “if we as the negative can prove that Russia has more destructive weapons than China you should vote negative.”
构架的第二个部分是告诉裁判为什么这是判定获胜者最佳方式。
例如成本和收益的案例,我们可以说:“这是这场辩论评判的最佳方式,因为它没给任何一方带来优势,所以它是最最公平的。”通常这些话都由“平衡”这个短语作为开头。我们可以做这样的辩论陈述:“平衡,意味着我们应该权衡成本和收益。”
For the costs and benefits example we might say, “This is the best way to measure the round because it gives neither side an advantage, so it’s the most fair”. It’s also common for resolutions to start with the phrase, “On balance.” We could say the resolution states, “On Balance, implying that we should weigh on balance the costs and the benefits.”
第二个案例,我们可以说:“这个构架应该更被认可,因为更大的威胁被定义为拥有更多破坏性武器,并且辩题要问我们的是哪个国家才是更大威胁。”
For the second example we might say, “This framework should be preferred since bigger threat is defined as having more destructive weapons and the resolution is asking us which country is the bigger threat.”

注意点是辩论中你可以选择的部分。
They are either important things you want the judge to remember or assumptions that you make utilizing the resolution. These are also numbered to maximize organization.
这部分要么是你想让裁判记住的要点,要么是你在辩论中用到的假设。这些注意点也需要被编号,使得组织最大化。
例如,如果辩题是“标准化考试对美国的教育有益处。”那么,我可以创建一个注意点,说“注意点1. 该辩题专指‘在美国’。因此任何有关其他国家的争论都应该被忽视。”
有一点需要牢记,如果你正在讲述注意点,它们应该有助于你的论述,并使其更强有力。而不是占用不必要的时间。

这部分是你的观点,也是投票给你的理由。
This provides enough time for each point to be established at the same time as having enough arguments that if one goes down you still have more that you can rely on.
我建议无论如何都有2-4个主要观点。这就给了足够的时间来牢牢建构每个点,同时也有足够的论点数量,如果某一个论点弱了,其他几个依然可以依赖。
现在,有几种不同格式你可以运用表达观点,不过我将教你最突出的格式(the most Prominent)做声明(claim),授权(warrant)和影响(impact)。
在这种格式下,一个观点的表述包含4个特征(trait)。
第一就是标题。这是你论点的标签。我可以说:“观点1:俄罗斯有许许多多武器。”你只需要对观点进行编号,再加上简短的句子来描述即将展开论证。
The first is the Title. This is the label for your argument. I might say, “Contention 1: Russia has a lot of weapons.” You simply need the number of the contention along with a brief sentence describing the argument to come.
观点第二部分就是声明。声明就是对你认为的事实做简要的陈述。就这个观点我可以说:“俄罗斯有成千上万个核弹头。”好了,在我论证的第三部分——授权开始前,这个陈述其实意思并不多。
The second part of your contention is the claim. A claim is simply a statement that you believe to be true. For this contention I might say, “Russia has thousands of nuclear warheads.” Now that statement doesn’t mean much until I bring the third part of the argument, the warrant.
授权就是给出理由,证明你声明是正确的。它可以是证据,也可以在某些情况下合乎逻辑的分析。在我们之前的案例中,“我曾看到全球军备控制协会在2015年10月报道,其指出,俄罗斯拥有7,700枚核弹头,而中国仅有260枚。”我的授权就是全球军备控制协会。
The warrant is the reason your claim is true. This could be evidence or in certain instances very logical analysis. For our example, "I might sight the Arms Control Association in October 2015 that states that Russia has 7,700 nuclear warheads whereas China only has 260." My warrant is the Arms Control Association.
影响是你论点之所以关乎紧要的原因。它告诉裁判后果如何。
The impact is the reason your argument matters. It tells the judge.

在结论中,你将重申你的观点,如果你在之前有介绍部分,把开头介绍和尾部结论联系起来总是好的。
In the conclusion you would reiterate your points and then if you had an introductions it's always good to tie that into your conclusion.
例如,“我们陈述了3个强有力的论点,分别是X,Y,Z。如果你同意史蒂芬·霍金的话,以及我们陈述的观点,请投赞成票或反对票。”
For example, “We have presented 3 strong arguments which were x, y, and z. If you agree with Stephen Hawking’s quote and the contentions we provided, please vote Affirmative or Negative.”
结论部分也是可选的(very optional)。
【版权声明】
除原创作品外,本平台所使用的文章、图片、视頻及音乐属于相关权利人所有,因客观原因,如存在不当使用的情况,敬请相关权利人随时与我们联系及时处理。