#009 - How To Debate

Welcome to the podcast Change a Law. This is John Thibault, the founder and CEO of iLobby and the author of the book how to Change a Law where we discuss politics, policy and, well, political persuasion because we want to empower voters to start thinking about changing laws. So join us Debate Structurally Speaking, debate has five main 1. A summary, 2. A position, 3 arguments, 4 rebuttals and 5 a conclusion. Most debates also have rules about its resources. These serve to act as constraints and they are time and votes. The purpose of debate is to come to a decision about a complex issue or topic. This is important because once you reach a decision, you're free to take action. So debate is really a decision process tool. Let me break down the five parts. 1. Summary the summary is like an opening statement or thesis. It is best if it is open ended and posed as a question. In the summary, you should pose a question, often starting with the word should. That is should the US be energy independent? Should Congress audit the Federal Reserve? Should we ban assault weapons? Should bad teachers be fired from our public schools? You're not trying to build an argument to support your case just yet. At this stage, you're simply asking a question. The summary usually includes some background or facts you to set out the framework for the audience. Number two Position. The position is simple. You either support the thesis, the summary, or you oppose it. You are either for it or against it. Once you know your position, then it's easy to argue. Generally, you will argue on one side of the issue or the other. Number three Arguments because people often have not made up their minds, you may find when you speak with someone, they argue out of both sides of their mouth. This happens because they either don't know their position or don't have the courage of their convictions. Depending on what side of the fence you're on. You select one side of an issue and you advance arguments that support your position. Arguments are intended to convince your audience that you are right that they should adopt your position, and in that way you gain support for your main thesis. Arguing is not yelling, it's persuading. It's not as complicated as it sounds because we do it every day. We just don't realize it and we don't do it well. Your arguments do not come out of thin air. They are generally based on facts. So you, the proponent, bring facts, reports, witnesses, statistics or anecdotal evidence to the table to support your case. The person arguing on the other side, your opponent, will bring conflicting evidence to support their case or point of view. Visualize this as a T and things should fall into place. Number four Rebuttals to add a little more complexity, we need to understand the value and placement of rebuttals and counter rebuttals. A rebuttal on the support side weakens the main argument. On the other hand, a counter rebuttal would diminish the strength of the opposition's arguments. The counter rebuttal acts as a double negative and could actually support the positive side of the argument, while a rebuttal to the main argument could support the opposition. Don't let this get too complex for you. Think of debates like competitive sports. Until you pick a team to support, it's just not very interesting. But once you get engaged, then you can't wait to see who wins or loses. Conclusion the resolution of the debate occurs when one side wins. The conclusion leads to a precise outcome and this determination leads to action. Let me comment on the two process constraint variables I mentioned. Time and votes Time in live debate. While time is a resource, it acts as a constraint and restricts how much a debater can spend on any one argument. Theoretically, this sharpens their thinking and like any game that has a fixed amount of time, a debate can run its course and then at some predetermined time, argument is cut off. Political debates are a good example of this. Votes at the conclusion A moderator gives the audience a chance to vote, just as a judge allows a jury to deliberate after a trial. They may vote based on facts or style, but in the end the audience inevitably picks one side or the other. They select the winner. A debate is a competition about ideas and the expression of an idea. All debates have rules. In real life, debates have moderators to keep the entire process moving along. If you understand the structure of the debate and the five main components, then it becomes clear how to position your message to convince others about what you want them to believe. Often when people argue, they a don't have the facts, b they bullheadedly stick to one side even when they're not sure what their position is anyway, or c they resort to ad hominem attacks. You see this all the time in talk radio and cable television. This kind of quasi debate can become emotional and anarchic, so the participants don't really follow formal rules. In these instances, civil discourse breaks down, there is a failure of diplomacy and violence and unreasoning the asserts itself. Remember, the intent of a debate is to intelligently resolve complex issues about topics of concern to many people. Learning to debate does not mean you need to become a great orator or do massive amounts of research. Learning how to debate simply means you understand what you believe in, you are clear on your position, and have a few good arguments to back you up. So by learning how to debate and following the rules, you can convince others to support you, respect you, and increase your chances for getting what you want. This has been the podcast Change a Law by John Thibault. To learn more, just sign on to our website at www.ilobby.co or or you can also visit www.changealaw.com. thanks for listening.