1705135375
1705135376
Another situation exists in which a debater might want to telegraph an argument using a point of information. That situation occurs when a debater hears the speaker making an argument that is contrary to one of the very important arguments the debater intends to introduce in a later speech. In that case, the debater can offer a point of information and, if it is accepted, can then state and briefly explain the argument. By making the argument in the point of information, the debater will prepare the judge or audience to pay careful attention to the argument when the debater makes it later. Additionally, if the debater briefly makes the argument in a point of information, and the debater who accepted the point of information later responds, the debater can then more fully develop the argument in the his or her speech.
1705135377
1705135378
A fourth reason for offering points of information involves the opportunity to establish or reestablish the direction of the debate. If, from a particular debater’s point of view, the debate has gotten off track, or if the debater believes the debate is not taking the direction the debater thinks it ought to take, a point of information can be a useful means of refocusing the debate. The notion of focusing the debate or setting the debate is sometimes called setting the agenda for the debate, or simply, agenda setting. By successfully setting the agenda for the debate, one team or one side may be able to dictate the overall outcome of the debate. If one team or one side sees a particular argument or set of arguments as especially important, or if they see a particular perspective on the issue as important, setting the agenda to focus on those arguments or perspectives is a very useful tool of persuasion. The ability to establish the framework or perspective within which the debate is seen by the audience or judge is one of the most important things that a team can do to have their arguments evaluated favorably.
1705135379
1705135380
Using points of information to set the direction or agenda of the debate may be one of the most important uses of points of information for members of the First Government and First Opposition Teams during the second half of the debate. Remember that the debate consists of eight constructive speeches, and the members of the First Government and First Opposition Teams are finished with their speeches after the third and fourth speeches. Without some means to continue to participate in the debate, the members of the teams in the first half of the debate have little to say about the direction or focus of the second half of the debate. Points of information give the members of the first two teams the opportunity to continue to participate, and even to possibly redirect the debate to the issues that they consider most important.
1705135381
1705135383
11.1.2 Developing Effective Points of Information
1705135384
1705135385
Effective points of information must be formulated during someone else’s speech. They are not elements of debate that can be formulated in advance of the debate. As a result of the necessity to formulate points of information during an opponent’s speech, the actual development of these points requires quick and critical thinking. The following are a few things to which debaters should do and should pay attention to during others’ speeches so that they can effectively develop points of information.
1705135386
1705135387
First, listen carefully. Although that bit of advice may sound obvious, debaters need to understand that a point of information can be developed from any argument they hear that can or should be refuted. Debaters need to listen carefully to all arguments so that, at the time they hear an argument being made that they can refute, they should immediately consider offering a point of information. Sometimes, however, instances where refutation is obvious are not the best times to offer points of information. If the refutation is unimportant, that is, if it would not be important enough to offer during a speech, the debater should think twice about offering the refutation as a point of information. When the debater makes the judgment that the point should be refuted, they should stand up immediately to offer the point.
1705135388
1705135389
Second, debaters should pay particular attention to arguments and to refutation made directly against those arguments. For example, if a debater accuses another debater of committing an inconsistency, the accused debater should immediately stand to offer a point of information. Similarly, anytime an argument is directly addressed to a particular person, that person should try to respond to that argument immediately. To do otherwise may give the judges and audiences the idea that the accused debater agrees with the accusation.
1705135390
1705135391
Third, like the second instance above, if a debater has personally refuted an argument and the speaker is in the process of trying to rebuild that argument, the first debater ought to offer a point of information relevant to that rebuilding process. Again, not to do so may indicate to the judges and audience that the rebuilding effort is successful because it is going uncontested.
1705135392
1705135393
Fourth, especially during the later phases of the debate, debaters should look for opportunities to direct or redirect the debate to an agenda that is consistent with the most important issues in the debate and is most favorable to their side. This is a very important opportunity that ought to be taken by members of the Opening Government and Opposition teams. Because they have no formal occasions to speak in the second half of the debate, points of information represent their only opportunities to contribute to the debate in the most important second half. They should use points of information to set or reset the agenda of the debate, to direct or redirect the debate toward points they made during their speeches, as well as to contribute excellent argumentation, in general.
1705135394
1705135395
Finally, almost as important as deciding when to offer points of information and what kinds of points to offer, debaters also need to think critically about when they should not try to make offers. Sometimes, a decision regarding whether or not to offer a point of information has to do with the timing in the speech. For example, a good time to rise to offer a point of information is immediately after the judge sounds the knock on the table indicating that protected time is finished. Rising at this first available moment signals to the judge that the debater is ready and eager to engage in the debate. If, on the other hand, a speaker is in the middle of developing an important argument, the debater wanting to offer a point of information might predict that the offer would not be accepted. The debater should consider waiting until the person is concluding a point or is making a short pause or transition between arguments. Doing so not only improves the debater’s chance of having a point accepted, but also does not interrupt the speaker, thus improving the debate for everyone.
1705135396
1705135398
11.1.3 Procedures for Offering Points of Information
1705135399
1705135400
Regardless of the purpose that a debater has in mind when offering a point of information, a certain process needs to be followed. First, the person offering the point of information needs to get the speaker’s attention. The debater can gain attention by standing and raising a hand, by simply standing quietly, or by standing and saying something like “Point of information, please.” The decision to simply stand or to vocalize the offer of a point of information is not trivial. In the first place, an offer of a point of information should be made in a manner that does not attempt to distract the speaker. In this regard, the most courteous way to offer a point of information is to simply stand quietly. However, occasionally the speaker may be standing in a particular position where he or she does not have a good view of the debaters on the other side. In that case, perhaps the most courteous way to offer a point of information is to stand, then during a pause in the speech to say “Point of information please.” Being courteous and not distracting the speaker is certainly one criterion to be used in deciding how to go about offering a point of information. Another involves making sure the speaker knows when a point is being offered. A speaker cannot accept a point of information if he or she is unaware that someone is offering one. Therefore, if a debater stands to offer a point of information and realizes that, for whatever reason, the speaker has not seen that he or she is preparing to offer a point, the debater should wait for a pause in the speaker’s speech, perhaps even for a transition between arguments, then should politely vocalize the offer.
1705135401
1705135402
Second, after getting the speaker’s attention, the person wanting to offer the point of information needs to wait to be recognized by the speaker. The person cannot actually offer the point of information until recognized by the speaker. The speaker may refuse the point by verbal statement(such as, “Not at this time please,” “No. Thank you,” etc.) or by nonverbal signal (such as waving in a downward motion to signal the person to sit back down). Alternatively, the speaker may accept the offer of the point of information by saying something such as “I’ll take your point.” Remember, the decision to accept or reject a point of information belongs solely to the speaker and cannot be appealed. Finally, when and if the offer of a point of information is accepted, the debater has a maximum of 15 seconds to actually complete the offer with a question or statement, and needs to be careful not to exceed that limit even though no one may be timing the point. Remember, the speaker has offered 15 seconds of his or her time, and the debater offering the point should show the corresponding courtesy of not abusing that offer.
1705135403
1705135405
11.2 Responding to Points of Information
1705135406
1705135407
The person speaking controls the time allocated for his or her speech and, therefore, needs to make decisions about accepting and declining points of information. Debaters should carefully consider which points to accept and which to decline. If a point is accepted, the debater needs to respond immediately and confidently. The following are some ideas that debaters should consider when deciding to accept offers of points of information and when actually responding to those points.
1705135408
1705135409
First, debaters should accept offers judiciously; speakers should accept some but not too many offers of points of information. Speakers who accept all points of information risk losing control of their entire speech and allowing their opponents to control the direction of the debate. Alternatively, by accepting no points of information, a debater may communicate to the judge or audience that he or she does not have much confidence in what is being argued or that he or she is unable to respond quickly to questions or criticisms. Most traditions of parliamentary debate suggest that a speaker accept a minimum of two points of information and a maximum of three or four.
1705135410
1705135411
A second factor to be considered when deciding which points to accept is the level of a debater’s comfort in the particular part of his or her speech. Debaters should accept points when they are in a comfortable part of their speech. If the debater is comfortable making a particular argument, for instance, the chances are better that he or she will be able to respond to the point with confidence. If the debater is having difficulty thinking of what to say, he or she should not compound that difficulty by accepting a point of information.
1705135412
1705135413
A third factor to be considered when deciding whether to accept or decline a point has to do with the person offering the point. Sometimes beginning debaters are afraid to accept a point of information from a strong speaker. As debaters become more confident, they need to consider accepting points from strong debaters rather than from relatively weaker ones. By accepting a point from one of the strongest speakers on the opposite side, debaters communicate to the judge and the audience that they have no fear of engaging the strongest speakers.
1705135414
1705135415
In any case, debaters should probably not accept more than one point from any speaker. In fairness to the two other teams on the opposite side of the debate, if a debater is going to accept only two offers of points of information, he should consider accepting one offer from each team rather than two points from any single team.
1705135416
1705135417
Beyond the decision of whether or not to accept offers of points of information, the debater needs to think in advance about how he or she will respond. Some simple guidelines may prove helpful.
1705135418
1705135419
First, once a debater decides to accept a point of information, he or she must be prepared to respond to the point immediately. Responding immediately demonstrates to the audience and the judge that the debater is a quick thinker and is able to think while he or she speaks. Sometimes a debater is tempted to respond to a point by saying “I’ll get back to your point later.” That is almost always an unwise response because it signals, rightly or wrongly, that the debater cannot think of the proper response quickly.
1705135420
1705135421
Sometimes, a debater, particularly a beginning debater, finds responding immediately to be especially difficult. That difficulty can be compounded if a debater finds the question to be difficult or requiring information that he or she simply does not possess. In such cases, a debater should be prepared to respond by arguing about the relevance or the importance of the question, or comment rather than trying to bluff others into thinking that they have information they simply do not have. So, to say something like “I think your question is a provocative one, but I don’t believe it is one that will prove central to this debate” is better than trying to give an answer involving information that the debater really does not have. A debater who takes offers judiciously increases the chances that he or she will be able to choose times when the questions will be directed toward information that he or she has. For the sake of ethical communication, as well as avoiding the appearance of trying to bluff through a lack of knowledge, debaters should learn to respond immediately with answers that are truthful.
1705135422
1705135423
Second, when debaters respond, they should not do so meekly, but should do so in a confident manner. Being confident does not mean being bombastic or even forceful. Debaters can respond in a confident and assertive manner without being forceful or aggressive. They should respond in a very clear and self-assured manner that suggests they are very confident about their answer. Even when debaters are unsure of the answer to the point that is posed, they should still muster all their confidence, even if they must say something like “Good question. I really don’t know the answer to it, but my partner and I will do our best to respond to it when you present that information in your speech. “
1705135424
[
上一页 ]
[ :1.705135375e+09 ]
[
下一页 ]