@ BETTER DEBATE MANUAL
Thinking and Speaking a Better World
Below is an article presenting an attempt at dealing with the proposition case.
WHAT does it consist of?
-
Definitions of the proposition types;
-
Specifics and illustrations;
-
Comparisons and contrasts between the main types of propositions – fact, value, policy – and their sub-types, where applicable;
-
The centrality of values
WHO is it for and WHERE/WHEN do I use it?
I normally use the information presented below:
-
with all levels: beginner, intermediate, or advanced debaters: the content can be easily tailored to the concrete needs of the participants, so it is accessible and friendly to everyone;
-
during training sessions in the context of the debate club;
HOW do I go about it/The Procedure:
Warming-up activities (10 minutes) – KW of the KWHLS critical thinking activity (What I Know; what I Want/Would like to know; How I will learn and work with my peers in order to reach common goals: gather information, share opinions and compare viewpoints)
Detailed study (50 minutes) – see the above outline of the activity
Final remarks/Questions: the last two stages in the KWHLS critical thinking activity: what I have Learned and how I will Share what I have learned or what I Still need to know.
Preparing the Groundwork
The Proposition Case
A Detailed Study
Types of Propositions
1. PROPOSITIONS OF FACT
A. Definition:
A proposition of fact describes a view of reality. Its purpose is to establish whether the stated description [of reality] is correct. It is a statement that can be proved using some kind of a measurement.
-
When we can prove something using a statement based on an observable event or measurable facts, we say that the statement is an objective statement. If you were to say that someone is two meters tall, you could objectively measure that person to see if the statement is correct.
-
When we make a statement and then use some agreed measurement to prove the truth of that statement, we are using objective verification.
-
If the statement and the measurement match (if the person is two meters tall), then the proposition of fact is valid. If we make a statement and the measurement proves us wrong (if the person is 1.5 meters tall), then the proposition of fact is invalid.
B. Propositions of fact may examine the past, present, or future.
For example:
-
Juries look at claims of past fact (what happened) when they consider propositions such as, “John Doe is guilty of first degree murder.”
-
Economists argue claims of present fact (what is happening) when they consider propositions such as, “The rate of inflation is increasing.”
-
People with political interests frequently debate claims of future fact (what will happen).
C. Many propositions of fact are also identified as historical or scientific in nature.
Historians and scientists are trying to discover meaning (what something means) with propositions like, “Resolved, that Lyndon Johnson’s ‘War on Poverty’ exacerbated the problems of poverty in the United States,” or “Resolved, that computers will alter the course of civilization.”
D. Notice that the focus of these propositions is on “is, was, or will be” not “good, bad” (like in value propositions).
E. Propositions of fact themselves are of different types:
Definition – when they assert that a certain definition ought to apply to a certain category of things: “The word terrorism should be applied to a certain category of acts.”
Description – when they assert how people, institutions, processes, etc. should properly be described: “The freedom of speech is an inviolable right.” Or “Iraq is a terrorist nation.”
Of Relationship – when they assert something about how two or more people, objects, institutions, actions, etc. are related to one another. There are two sub-types/sub-categories here:
-
Propositions of similarity – when they assert that two or more people, objects, institutions, actions, etc. are similar to one another: “Capital punishment is like murder.”
-
Propositions of cause and effect/causality – when they assert that two or more people, objects, institutions, actions, etc. are related to each other via cause and effect
F. If participants debate non policy propositions of fact, many of the problems faced by debating propositions of value or policy might be overcome.
In-depth fact analysis may be more within the reach of our students than in depth value analysis. As one observer notes: “Propositions of fact...are often easy to understand since the advocate of the proposition needs only to demonstrate the existence of certain facts to ‘prove’ the case to the audience” (Tuman, 1986, p.86). Fact analysis requires empirical and authoritative validation. Value analysis requires a comprehensive understanding of philosophy, sociology, and psychology.
2) PROPOSITIONS OF VALUE
Definition:
A proposition of value requires the affirmative to persuade the judges and audience to accept an opinion or value.
-
Provide a general definition of the value term you are discussing. Let’s keep this simple. A proposition of value may be the following: “The security of a society outweighs the personal freedoms of individuals”
-
Provide the specific definition for the value term. This is called the contextual definition for the value.
-
Provide standards of measurement, or criteria. Use criteria to show that you have justified your value.
-
Provide proof that supports the criteria.
Propositions of value subdivide into:
-
Simple value propositions – when they attach some value to a person, object, institution, act, etc.: “Abortion is an immoral act”
-
Comparative value proposition – when they compare two or more people, objects, institutions, etc. with respect to
3) PROPOSITION OF POLICY
Definition:
A proposition of policy recommends taking a certain action.
The Stock Issues:
a) You must prove that there is a need to change the current policy because the situation is harmful. Your harm could be the people who die or are injured, have psychological pain, lose their quality of life, are subjected to a lower standard of living, or lose their independence because of the current state or situation.
References
-
Trapp Robert, Discovering the World Through Debate, A Practical Guide to Educational Debate for Debaters, Coaches and Judges –Third Edition , 2005, ISBN 1-932716-06-8
-
Trapp Robert, Lesson Plan of Week 7 Propositions
-
Simona Mazilu, The K-W-H-L-S Critical Thinking Strategy - An Effective Way to Engage Students in Preparing Debate Motions
Watch More Great Videos on the Proposition Case
PROJECT VIDEO: Romanian debate trainer Simona Mazilu speaks about The Proposition Case in Theory at WSDA 2013
PROJECT VIDEO: Romanian debate trainer Simona Mazilu speaks about Proposition Case Analysis and Preparation at WSDA 2013
some value: “Unwanted pregnancies are more immoral than abortion” or “Capital punishment is more humane than life imprisonment without the possibility of parole” or “Individual autonomy is more important than community.”
Proposition Case Theory
G. Rhydian Morgan explains how to make a solid proposition case
World Schools Debate Academy
2013
Basic Proposition Case
Serban Pitic talks about the most basic elements of a proposition case
World Schools Debate Academy
2011
PROJECT VIDEO: Romanian debate trainer Serban Pitic speaks generally about The Proposition Case at WSDA 2013
b) You must prove that there is a significant need. In some cases, you might want to show how many people are affected by the current policy. If you are discussing an environmental problem, for example, you might describe how it impacts humans or discuss how it seriously affects an ecological system. Or perhaps you would prove that some value, such as a culture, is being lost by current actions or policy.
c) You must prove inherency. Inherency means that the status quo (Latin for “current system”) is not solving the problem. Perhaps social attitudes or bad laws are causing the harm. Whatever the inherency, you need to show how it exists and that it allows the harm to continue.
d) You must provide a plan to solve the problem. A plan is the action you would take to reduce or eliminate the harms the status quo is causing. You need to include several points in your plan. You need to explain who will take the action (agent of action); what will be done (mandate); how you would pay for the plan (financing); and who will make sure the plan is carried out (enforcement). The individual points of the plan are called PLANKS:
-
Plank One: Agent of Action. An agent of action is the individual, group, or government that will adopt the plan.
-
Plank Two: Mandate. A mandate is the specific action the plan requires.
-
Plank Three: Financing or Funding. Financing lists specific sources of funding, such as taxes.
-
Plank Four: Enforcement. Enforcement indicates the specific agency that will implement the mandates.
e) You should prove solvency or how the plan will solve or reduce the harm you presented in stock issue one.
f) You should provide advantages or additional benefits to the plan. These advantages may not address the harm directly but will discuss other good things that will result from adopting the plan, thus provide more reasons to accept the proposition.