Debate Proposition, Issues, Proof, Evidence, and Argument

Debate proposition refers to the precisely formulated statement that embodies the contention which a debater asserts or denies. It is pretty much like a clearly stated proposal or resolution put forward for consideration or discussion.

There are two (2) basic types of proposition: the proposition of policy and the proposition of fact. A proposition of policy aims at action as it deals with whether or not something ought to be done. Whereas, a proposition of fact aims at belief as it deals with whether or not something is true.

“Resolved, That death penalty be abolished” is a proposition of policy while “Resolved, That the current Philippine president deserves to be impeached” is a proposition of fact (though it may also appear to be a proposition of policy as it is political in nature).

A debate proposition involves debate issues. They are the crucial points involved in a proposition that the affirmative should establish to prove its case. Many points may be said to be related to the proposition but not all of them are considered debate issues. If the affirmative can lose a particular point and still prove its case, then that point is not an issue.

In a proposition of policy, issues are usually divided as issues of (a) practicability (Is the proposition practicable?), (b) necessity (Is the proposition necessary?), and (c) beneficiality (Is the proposition beneficial?).

To have a debate, there must be a proposition and not just a term or topic. Debaters argue a proposition and cannot just debate on mere subjects like “The parliamentary form of government.” Any subject matter alone is useless in debate for it does not indicate what should be proved or disproved.

Properly formulating the debate proposition helps the debaters, audience, and judges to understand the discussion. It prevents debaters from arguing about things totally outside the real issue and establishing matters that are beside the point.

The following are some guidelines in making and properly phrasing a debate proposition:

1. The proposition should be debatable, controversial, and interesting.

‘Propositions’ like, “Resolved, That triangle has three sides” or “That man is spelled m-a-n.” are good only for aliens perhaps. These examples are pretty much related to ‘tautologies’ in Logic. Tautologies are always true but oftentimes not worth mentioning, much less becoming a proposition in academic debate.

Remember that something is not debatable if it is evidently true or evidently false. For this reason, the proposition, “Resolved, That the only way to be rich is to work abroad” is not debatable as it is experientially not true.

Statements which beg the question and those which cannot be proved approximately true or false are also not debatable. The proposition, “Resolved, That excessive oil price hike be prohibited” begs the question because of the word “excessive.” “Resolved, That Venus soil is sweeter than Mars soil,” on the other hand,  cannot be proved true or false (at least for now). Furthermore, this proposition on planets’ soil is objectionable as it seems to have no immediate interest for anyone. (Who cares about the taste of the soil there?)

2. The proposition should be in the affirmative form that the burden of proof is on the affirmative side.

‘Proposition’ like “Resolved, That there is no Santa Claus” is not a good proposition, for the burden of proof should basically be on the side of the one wanting to prove that there is Santa Claus. It has been said that “He who affirms must prove,” so the one who makes the claim or charge should carry the burden of proof.

On the other hand, the proposition, “Resolved, That the person who does not love his own language is neither  worse than animal nor smelly fish” (based from a Filipino saying) not only confuses the debaters on who should take the burden of proof, but also leaves everyone else guessing what the topic really is about. Lesson learned: Fill the proposition with ‘negative indicators’ (not, no, never, etc.) and the debate will become a stand-up comedy!

Remember that the proposition should be so constructed that the affirmative side is on the offence, challenging the status quo, or promoting something new.

3. The proposition should involve only one central idea.

The proposition, “Resolved, That vocational courses be offered in all prisons in the Philippines, and all companies be required to hire the ex-convicts” contains two distinct underlying ideas and subsequently different sets of issues. This is unacceptable as a debate proposition because one side may win in the proposition’s first central issue and lose in another, thereby making the rendering of decision problematic.

4. The proposition should be free from ambiguity and vagueness.

Ambiguity is the quality of being open to more than one interpretation. Thus, ambiguous terms are basically those with more than one meaning. In contrast, a term is vague when something went wrong with the intension or what is referred to by the concept. Terms like some, a few, many, and almost all are good examples of vague terms. These terms leave us guessing how many items are being talked about.

The proposition “Resolved, That some Ateneans are better than many La Salleans” involves both ambiguity and vagueness. The terms “some” and “many” do not clarify who or how many are being referred to, and the word “better” can be interpreted in numerous distinct ways.

Propositions should be precisely and unequivocally formulated, lest the debate may lapse into arguing about the meaning of the terms in the proposition, not the proposition itself. (Among other things, how to properly rephrase ambiguous and vague expressions is taught in the online lecture “Ambiguity and Vagueness” accessible through the search engine [upper right section] of www.OurHappySchool.com.)

If any term in the proposition is found to be vague or ambiguous, the two opposing teams should agree as soon as possible (especially during the pre-debate conference) on the working definition of the term for the specific contest.

5. The proposition should not be too broad and too complex.

The proposition must not be too wide-ranging or too difficult to deal with. It should be reasonably narrow in scope to allow adequate treatment in the allotted time. For instance, the proposition, “Resolved, That the Bible is unbelievable” is too broad and too complex as biblical pronouncements are too many and too varied in range. The proposition covers too much issue that no conclusion may be reached.

In summary, “As soon as one has an interesting, debatable proposition embodying a central idea which is not too broad, is phrased briefly and definitely, is free from ambiguous and general terms, and places upon the affirmative the burden of proof, he is ready for the work of getting at the heart of the question” (Aquino & Deveza, 1995, p. 125).

Proof, Evidence, and Argument

Debate and argumentation fundamentally entail establishing the truth or falsity of a proposition by organized and logical presentation of proofs. But what is a proof in debate? How is it related to evidence and argument?

Proof, evidence, and argument are fundamentally interrelated so much so that many find them interchangeable. In fact, the Encarta Dictionary defines proof as“conclusive evidence:evidence or an argument that serves to establish a fact or the truth of something” (“Proof,” 2009).

In debate, proof refers to anything which serves, either directly or indirectly, to convince the mind of the truth or falsity of a claim or proposition. Additionally, proof stands for the conviction generated in the mind. Hence, the term proof may be used to denote that which convinces the mind or the produced conviction itself.

Evidence, on the other hand, basically refers to that which tends to prove or disprove something. It is something that “gives a sign … of the existence or truth of something, or that helps somebody to come to a particular conclusion” (“Evidence,” 2009). As distinct from proof, evidence is “that which tends to generate proof or render it evident … any matter of fact whose effect, tendency, or design is to produce in the mind a persuasion [or conviction]—affirmative or negative—of the existence of some other matter of fact” (Aquino & Deveza, 1995, p. 135). The common sources of evidence are persons (e.g. authorities), documents (related literatures), things, and events.

Connectedly, argument refers to “reason put forward in support of or in opposition to a point of view” (“Argument,” 2009). Although the term may also refer to a discourse, debate, discussion, contention, and line of reasoning, “argument” contextually stands for “the process by which the debater infers the existence of other facts from knowing the existence of one fact or a number of facts” (Aquino & Deveza, 1995, p. 135). If P is the fact to be proved (principal fact) and Q is the evidence submitted (evidentiary fact), then the claim that Q proves P is an argument.

In summary, argument is the intellectual process by which, from knowing one thing, the mind moves on to another. Evidence entails all the matters of fact that may be utilized in generating proof. And proof refers to the effect of evidence. To use an analogy, evidence “is the raw materials from which the finished product—proof—is to be manufactured … argument is the process by which the raw material, evidence, is turned into the finished product, proof” (Aquino & Deveza, 1995, p. 135). (© 2014 by Jensen DG. Mañebog/MyInfoBasket.com)

Also Check Out:
Reasoning and Debate: A Handbook and a Textbook by Jensen DG. Mañebog

Also Check Out: From Socrates to Mill: An Analysis of Prominent Ethical Theories, also by author Jensen DG. Mañebog