Rebuttals In Debate by English Debate Gurukul. “Rebuttals In Debate” is the topic of today’s video. We are currently publishing a series called “Introduction to English Debating”. “Rebuttals In Debate” is the 11th class of our new series “Introduction to English Debating”.
Rebuttals In Debate
Rebuttal
Arguments are weakest at the evidence stage as it’s easy to argue against, for example, the evidence may consist of isolated examples or there may be counter-evidence. But it’s not a good technique because the opposition can provide more evidence or rebut your criticisms.
It’s difficult to rebut claims because they are usually reasonable but if you can attack a claim then that speaker’s whole argument falls apart. So if you think a claim is vulnerable then rebut it but you will need a strong explanation to show why it doesn’t matter.
There are common flaws you can look for to form a rebuttal:
1. False dichotomy – this is where the speaker is trying to divide the debate into two sides even though there are more alternatives than the state. It’s likely the speaker is doing this on purpose but in some cases, they do not understand the debate.
2. Assertion – this is when a speaker presents a statement that isn’t actually an argument because there is no reason to believe that the statement is valid. It may just be an assumption. You can point out that there has not been enough examination to prove this validity and then give a reason why the assertion is (probably) not valid.
3. Morally flawed – arguments can be morally flawed, for example, “All criminals given a prison sentence should be given the death penalty instead, this will save the country money and space.” What has been argued is true but it’s clearly morally flawed.
4. Correlation rather than causation – a speaker may suggest a link between two events and suggest one led to the other. But the speaker may not explain how one caused the other event which can make an argument invalid.
5. Failure to deliver promises – sometimes a speaker might fail to complete a task they promised to deliver. For instance, they may state that they will provide evidence supporting a certain claim but they may lose track of what they have said and not actually do this.
6. Straw man – the opposing team introduces an argument and then rebuts it. They may use an extreme example of your proposal or perhaps they were hoping that you would make this argument.
7. Contradiction – an argument the other team presents may contradict one of their previous arguments. You must point out that the arguments cannot be true simultaneously and then explain how this reduces their case’s credibility.
8. Compare the conclusion to reality – think “What would happen if what they (the other team) are suggesting is implemented right now?” This usually shows that it’s more complicated than they have suggested and the changes can cause secondary problems.
Rebuttals In Debate Details :
Read more: