Karl Popper Debate Format

Karl Popper Debate
Bakhti Mizhgon
1401143508
Introduction
The Karl Popper Debate format focuses on relevant
and often deeply divisive propositions, emphasizing
the development of critical thinking skills, and
tolerance for differing viewpoints.
To facilitate these goals, debaters work together in
teams of three, and must research both sides of
each issue.
Each team is given the opportunity to offer
arguments and direct questions to the opposing
team. Judges then offer constructive feedback,
commenting on logical flaws, insufficient evidence,
or arguments that debaters may have overlooked.
Karl Popper
number of people in the debate: 6
number of people in a team: 3
number of teams in the debate: 2
Types of team: affirmative(A),
negative(N)
Rules
1. No research is permitted.
Topic research must be completed prior to
the beginning of a debate.
2. No outside assistance is permitted.
No outside person(s) may conduct research
during the debate and provide information.
Debaters, however, are allowed to consult
whatever research materials they have
brought with them to the debate.
Rules
3. Debaters should be able to provide sources
for direct citations.
When debaters refer to any public
information, they should be prepared to
provide, upon request, complete source
documentation to the opposing team and to
the judge. Ordinarily, such documentation
would include the name of an author (if 3
any), the name and date of a publication (and
a page number, if available), or the URL of a
Web site.
Rules
4. Debaters should practice intellectual honesty.
Students should cite arguments and statistics truthfully,
and never fabricate sources or data.
5. Debate should be approached as a team activity.
Each debate team is composed of three individuals who
will speak in the roles they announce at the start of the
debate. Debaters may change their role in the debate
from round to round.
6. The affirmative and the negative teams will have
equal time to present their arguments.
Debate Format
The debate is composed of ten parts.
Six of these consist of speeches
that is, uninterrupted presentations
by a designated speaker.
The remaining four consist of cross
examination that is, a series of
questions and answers involving one
speaker from each side.
Karl Popper Breakdown

Order
Speaker
Affirmative Constructive
1st Negative Cross-Examination
N asks
Negative Constructive
1st Affirmative Cross-Examination
asks
Affirmative Rebuttal
2nd Negative Cross-Examination
asks
Negative Rebuttal
2nd Affirmative Cross-Examination
asks
Affirmative Rebuttal
Negative Rebuttal
Time
6 minutes
3 minutes
1A
1 A answers/3
6 minutes
3 minutes
1N
1 N answers/3A
5 minutes
3 minutes
2A
2 A answers/1 N
5 minutes
3 minutes
5 minutes
5 minutes
2N
2 N answers/1 A
3A
3N
1. Affirmative Constructive
(1A)
In this speech, the affirmative team is
expected to offer its complete argument
in favor of the resolution.
Although later affirmative speakers may
repeat points and expand on them later in
the debate, the first affirmative speaker
must present the entirety of his or her
teams case, including whatever criteria or
definitions the team views as
instrumental.
2. First Negative Cross-Examination

The two debaters are expected to face the audience (as opposed to
each other).
The negative debater is expected to ask questions rather than make
speeches.
The affirmative debater is expected to answer these questions; he or
she should not make speeches or ask questions in return.
The affirmative debater may make concessions during this crossexamination, but it is incumbent upon the negative team to capitalize
on these concessions in the speech that immediately follows.
Team members should not assist their teammates by offering
suggestions or by answering questions on their behalf.
During the cross-examination period, only the examiner may ask
questions and only the speaker may answer them. No spoken
communication between either the examiner, or the speaker and his
or her teammates, is allowed.
3. Negative Constructive
(1N)
Like the affirmative team in its constructive, the
negative team is expected to offer a complete
argument against the affirmatives position.
The affirmatives definition, if not challenged at
this point, should stand. Similarly, if the
negative does not offer competing criteria, it is
assumed that the criteria articulated by the
affirmative team will govern the round.
Finally, the negative team must challenge the
affirmative's arguments; otherwise, it will be
assumed that these arguments are acceptable.
4. First Affirmative CrossExamination

The rules of procedure for the "First
Negative Cross-Examination" also
apply here.
5. First Affirmative Rebuttal

(2A)
The affirmative speaker has two tasks in this speech.
First, he or she must outline their refutations of the
negative arguments.
Second, he or she must respond to the refutations
made by the negative team (that is, the negative's
objections to the affirmative case). If the affirmative
speaker does not refute a given point in the negative
case, then the point stands; if the affirmative speaker
does not respond to a particular negative objection,
then the objection is conceded.
New evidence for existing arguments may be
presented.
6. Second Negative CrossExamination

The rules of procedure outlined
above, under "First Negative Crossexamination" also apply here.
7. First Negative Rebuttal

(2N)
As with the affirmative rebuttal described above,

the negative speaker has a dual task: first, he or
she must respond to the refutations made by the
affirmative, and second, he or she should continue
to attack the affirmative case. At this point in the
debate, the negative speaker may start to draw the
judge's attention to points that have been dropped.
That is, he or she will indicate items to which
affirmative has not responded. Such a dropped
point is treated as a concession made by the
affirmative team. New evidence for existing
arguments may be presented.
8. Second Affirmative CrossExamination

The rules of procedure outlined
above, under "First Negative Crossexamination," also apply here.
9.Second Affirmative
Rebuttal (3A)
The task of the affirmative speaker in this speech
is reactive. He or she should renew refutations that
have not been addressed adequately. Usually, this
means pointing out flaws in the negative rebuttal.
At this point, most good debaters will deliberately
let some points drop and will focus the judge's
attention on the key issues in the round.
The speaker may or may not instruct the judge;
that is, the speaker may or may not articulate a
standard of judgment for the round. New evidence
for existing arguments may be presented.
10. Second Negative

Rebuttal (3N)
In essence, the second negative rebuttal is
similar to the second affirmative rebuttal.
Judges should be especially wary of
speakers introducing new arguments at
this point since the affirmative team has
no chance to respond, so a new argument
is especially unfair.
The judge should ignore any new
arguments that are introduced.
Judge Role
A Judge should carefully listen to
arguments of debaters
Take notes all arguments and
rebuttals.
Count points; if negative team
brought a good argument that
weakens the argument of affirmative
than a point goes to negative team.
Same rule applies to affirmative
team.

Karl Popper Debate Format

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Karl Popper Debate Format

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Karl Popper Debate Format

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Karl Popper Debate

Karl Popper Breakdown

2. First Negative Cross-Examination

4. First Affirmative CrossExamination

5. First Affirmative Rebuttal

6. Second Negative CrossExamination

7. First Negative Rebuttal

As with the affirmative rebuttal described above,

8. Second Affirmative CrossExamination

10. Second Negative

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.