辩论术语

A

Advantages

The part of the affirmative case about policies that demonstrates the positive

effects of the affirmative’s plan.

Ambiguity

A fallacy of language that occurs when a word in an argument has two or more

possible meanings and the listener has no means to determine adequately

which meaning the arguer intends.

Analogy

An argument that supports associations between things based on their

similarity or dissimilarity.

Appeal to fear

A fallacious argument that occurs when an arguer uses irrelevant appeals to

fear to take the focus off the arguer’s original argument.

Appeal to popularity

A fallacious argument that occurs when a debater uses the popularity of a

person, product, or belief to justify a favorable conclusion about that person,

product, or belief.

Appeal to tradition

A fallacious argument made when a debater argues in favor of a particular

action on the grounds of tradition rather than on the basis of that action’s

merits.

Argument

A controversial statement, frequently called a claim, supported by evidence

and a warrant. The standards of a logically good argument include

acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency.

See also Standard of acceptability, Standard of relevance, standard of

sufficiency.

Argumentation

The uniquely human use of reasoning to communicate.

Argument ad hominem

A fallacy that occurs when an arguer attacks a person’s character or

background, which is irrelevant to the claim.

Argument by example

An argument that supports an association between specific examples and a

general rule.

Argument by incompatibility

An argument designed to reject something because it is incompatible with

something else.

Argument by principle

An argument that supports a certain action based on the connection between

that action and a general principle.

Argument sphere

A community within which arguments are made.

Argument structure

The way evidence and warrants are arranged to support a claim.

See also Convergent argument structure; Independent argument structure;

Simple argument structure.

Arrangement

The organization of arguments in a speech.

Authority

An argument that supports a claim with the opinion of experts in the field.

B

Ballot

A document on which the judge records the decision, the reasons for the

decision, and speaker points awarded to each debater.

Begging the question

A fallacy of acceptability that occurs when a debater introduces evidence that

is the same as the claim.

C

Case

One or more arguments sufficient to support a proposition.

Causal argument

An argument that supports associations between causes and effects.

See also Contributory causal argument; Intervening and counteracting causal

argument; Necessary causal argument; Sufficient causal argument.

Cause-and-effect proposition

A proposition that asserts that one object causes a specific outcome.

Cause-and-effect reasoning

The type of reasoning that examines the reasons certain actions, events, or

conditions (causes) create specific consequences (effects).

Claim

A controversial statement an arguer supports using reason. Claims are divided

into four general categories: definitional descriptive, relational, and evaluative.

Comparative advantages case

A method used for developing a case about policies that advocates the

adoption of the plan based on its advantages compared with the status quo or

some other policy.

Comparative policy proposition

Compares two or more policies.

Comparative value proposition

Compares two or more objects with respect to some value.

Constructive speech

A speech that presents a debater’s basic arguments for or against the

resolution.

Contributory causal argument

An argument that states that the purported cause is one of several contributors

to the effect.

Convergent argument structure

Two or more bits of evidence that, in combination with one another, support a

claim.

Counterplan

A plan proposed by the negative team as an alternative to the affirmative plan.

Cross-examination

A period during the debate when a member of one team asks questions of a

member of the opposing team.

D

Debate

The process of arguing about claims in situations where an adjudicator must

decide the outcome.

Dissociation

An argument that creates new categories by dividing an old category into two

new ones.

E

Equivocation(as Ambiguity)

A fallacy of language that occurs when a word is used in two different senses

and the meaning of the word is shifted during the argument.

Evidence

Different types of information (facts, statistics, theories, opinions, or narratives)

that are used to support arguments. Evidence can be divided into two

categories: that relating to reality (facts, theories, and presumptions) and that

relating to preference (values, value hierarchies, and value categories).

See also Facts; Presumption; Theory; Value; Value categories; Value

hierarchy.

F

Facts (evidence)

Observed or observable data.

Fallacy

An argument that fails to meet any one of the standards of acceptability,

relevance, and sufficiency.

See also Argument ad hominem; Ambiguity; Appeal to fear; Appeal to

popularity; Appeal to tradition; Begging the question; Equivocation; Fallacy of

composition; Fallacy of division; Fallacy of incompatibility; Faulty analogy;

Hasty conclusion; Improper appeal to practice; Loaded term; Poisoning the

well; Post hoc fallacy; Problematic premise; Red herring; Slippery slope

argument; Straw person fallacy; Two wrongs fallacy; Vagueness.

Fallacy of composition(由部分推论整体)

A fallacious argument where the evidence is drawn from some part of a whole

but the conclusion is about the whole.

Fallacy of division（由整体推论部分）

An erroneous argument where the evidence is drawn from the whole, but the

conclusion is made about the part.

Fallacy of incompatibility

Occurs when a debater makes a statement as evidence that is at odds with

another statement made by the debater, or when a debater’s argument is

incompatible with some action she has performed or recommended

elsewhere.

Faulty analogy

A fallacious argument that occurs when two cases are compared with each

other but are not similar in terms of the relationship stated in the comparison.

G

Guilt by association

A fallacious argument that occurs when a person’s argument is attacked using

that person’s association with groups and people rather than using issues

pertinent to the argument.

H

Hasty conclusion

A fallacious argument that fails to meet the standard of sufficiency. It includes

hasty generalization, irrelevant slippery slope arguments, fallacy of

composition, fallacy of division, faulty analogy, improper appeal to practice,

post hoc fallacy, and two wrongs.

Hasty generalization

A fallacy of reasoning by example that occurs when the examples selected to

support the claim are either insufficient in number or in their

representativeness.

Improper appeal to practice

A fallacious argument that occurs when a debater suggests doing something

because it is a common practice, even if that practice clearly is wrong.

I

Independent argument structure

Several pieces of evidence, any one of which can provide sufficient support for

a claim.

International debating

Debating that occurs between representatives of different countries, nations,

or cultures.

Intervening and counteracting causal argument

An argument that demonstrates a cause that prevents the completion of a

cause-and-effect sequence.

Irrelevant reason

An argument that fails to meet the relevance criterion. It includes ad hominem

argument, appeal to fear, appeal to popularity, appeal to tradition, guilt by

association, poisoning the well, red herring, and straw person.

J

Judge

An observer of a debate who has the responsibility of deciding which team has

done a better job of debating.

K

Karl Popper debate format

A debate format that matches two three-person teams against each other: one

affirming the proposition and one opposing it. Each team has one constructive

speech presenting its basic arguments for and against the proposition and two

constructive speeches refuting the opposing team’s arguments and

summarizing its own.

L

Loaded term

A fallacy of language that occurs when the arguer labels something with a

word that includes an evaluation and that evaluation plays a role in supporting

the conclusion.

M

Method of agreement

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines more

than one case where two elements are simultaneously present, concluding

that one is the cause of the other.

Method of correlation

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines

examples that demonstrate that as the amount of the cause increases (or

decreases), the effect will also increase (or decrease).

Method of difference

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines

examples wherein both the purported cause and the purported effect are

absent, concluding that one is the cause of the other.

Minor repair

A strategy the negative uses to defend the present system with minor

changes.

N

Necessary causal argument

An argument that states that without the suspected cause, the effect cannot

occur, thus the cause is necessary to produce the effect.

Need

The part of the affirmative case about policies that identifies a certain problem

in the status quo that the existing system cannot solve.

Need-plan-benefit case

A method used for developing a case about policies that involves the

identification of a need, proposal of a plan, and a demonstration of the

advantages of the plan.

P

Plan

A course of action proposed by the affirmative when debating a proposition of

policy that proposes to solve the problems identified in the “need.”

Poisoning the well

A fallacious argument that attempts to discredit a person or a source in

advance of that person’s argument.

Post hoc fallacy

Occurs when a debater assumes that because one thing predates another, the

first must have caused the second.

Preparation time

The time allotted to each team for preparation during the debate (eight minutes

in Karl Popper debate).

Presumption

The assumption that current policies will be maintained until someone makes a

case that another policy is a better option.

Presumption (evidence)

A statement concerning what people ordinarily expect to happen in the course

of normal events.

Problematic premise

A fallacious argument that fails to meet the acceptability criterion. It includes

begging the question and the fallacy of incompatibility.

Proposition

A final claim made by a debater and supported by a combination of claims.

Proposition of definition

Asserts that a certain definition should be applied to a certain category of

things.

Proposition of description

Asserts a proper way to describe an object or a number of objects.

Proposition of evaluation

Attaches a value to any object.

Proposition of relationship

Assert a certain relationship between objects.

Proposition of similarity

Asserts that two objects are similar to each other.

R

Reasoning

The process used to connect evidence to the claim.

See also warrant.

Rebuttal speeches

The speeches in the debate that challenge and defend arguments introduced

in the constructive speeches.

Red herring转移注意力的话，故意偏题

A fallacious argument that shifts the focus from the original argument.

Refutation

The process of attacking and defending arguments.

Research

The process of locating and selecting evidence in preparation for debate.

Reservation保留意见，疑惑

An exception made to a claim. A reservation usually involves a situation in

which the arguer does not wish to maintain the claim.

S

Simple argument structure

A single claim leading from a single piece of evidence following along a single

warrant.

Simple policy proposition

A proposition that urges adoption of a certain policy.

Simple value proposition

Attaches a value to a single object.

Slippery slope argument

An argument that connects a series of events in a causal chain that ultimately

leads to disaster or calamity. Slippery slope arguments are fallacies if the

series of events is improperly connected.

Standard of acceptability

Determines whether the evidence is acceptable to those who judge the

argument.

Standard of relevance

Determines whether the evidence is relevant to the claim it supports.

Standard of sufficiency

Determines whether all of the evidence taken as a whole is sufficient to

support the claim.

Standards of a logically good argument

Standards are acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency.

Stasis

A system devised to determine the key issues of clash in a topic. These key

issues can be used to develop a system of research.

Status quo

The course of action currently pursued (i.e., the present system).

Straw person fallacy

Occurs when an arguer, intentionally or unintentionally, misinterprets an

opponent’s argument, then proceeds to refute the misinterpreted argument as

if it were the opponent’s actual argument.

Style

The use of language, voice, and body language used by a debater.

Sufficient causal argument

An argument that states that the presence of a cause virtually guarantees (is

sufficient for) the presence of the effect.

T

Theory

A statement that explains other facts or that predicts the occurrence of events.

Toulmin Model of argument

A model of argument developed by philosopher Stephen Toulmin. The basic

model includes evidence, warrant, claim, and reservation.

Two wrongs fallacy

Occurs when a debater makes an argument urging the audience to accept, or

condone, one thing that is wrong because another similar thing, also wrong,

has been accepted and condoned.

V

Vagueness

A fallacy of language that occurs when the meaning of some word or words in

an argument is indeterminate and when such vagueness prevents listeners

from assessing the argument.

Value

Evidence based on the audience’s preferred value.

Value case

A case supporting a proposition of value. Three principal elements of such a

case are describing, relating, and evaluating.

Value categories (evidence)

An arrangement of values into groups so that a group (category) can be used

as evidence.

Value hierarchy (evidence)

Evidence based on how values are arranged in relation to each other.

W

Warrant

Stated or unstated reasoning process that explains the relationship between

the evidence and the claim.

差等关系：subalternation

矛盾关系:contradiction

上反对关系：contrariety

下反对关系: subcontrariety

判断：proposition

充分条件sufficient condition

必要条件necessary condition

充分条件假言直言推理sufficient conditional hypothetical syllogism

必要条件假言直言推理necessary conditional hypothetical syllogism

前件：antecedent

后件: consequent

肯定式：constructive mood

否定式：destructive mood

直接推理：immediate inference

间接推理：mediate inference