Public debate is a key element of a vibrant democracy. It fosters the formation of informed opinions and strengthens citizens’ ability to hold their leaders accountable. It also allows for the comparison and evaluation of different perspectives, which may help to reframe or de-legitimize a previously held position. However, in the context of rising populism, political division and disinformation, debates have been increasingly subject to criticism. This article explores the arguments for and against the legitimacy of this popular democratic practice.
Debate is a form of verbal argumentation between two teams that are pre-assigned by the tournament to uphold (or affirm) or attack (or negate) a resolution. It consists of constructive and rebuttal speeches, as well as questioning periods between the opposing teams. Debates are usually moderated by a judge, which ensures fair play.
Before the questioning period, debaters prepare an opening speech in which they introduce the audience to the upcoming discussion and share their research. This is not one of the central speeches, but should be comprehensive enough to allow the audience to grasp the overall context. It is also important to clarify the judges’ preferences at the beginning, so that competitors are able to adapt their style accordingly. For example, some judges prefer a faster and more technical contest; in other cases they may prefer a conversational & traditional format.
About the Author
