First, break the topic-that is, deeply understand the central idea of the debate and analyze the core issues that the debate responds to. The problem is directional. Once the solution is wrong, the direction is wrong, and even faster is the opposite direction. For example, in a competition, I am a judge, and the positive argument is that professionals are more adaptable to society than generalists. Their argument is based on the fact that generalists do not exist at all. Therefore, it has been decided that once the argument is put forward, the affirmative will lose. Why? Because they have questions about the topic. Since the topic is put forward in this way, a hypothesis is given: generalists and professionals coexist. They don't understand the argument at all, so they blindly demonstrate, and it is useless to fully and rigorously demonstrate. By the way, the debate here. Debate is an argument of one side. A good debate must be distinguishable, and both sides should have distinguishable space. There are obvious contradictions and conflicts between the two, and there is no distinction between academic and moral merits. Otherwise, it will be a bad debate. This determines that any good debate has no right or wrong. Any good debater knows this very well, so he will never dwell on a debate topic again and again. I hope that from the debate, those who seek truth simply don't understand the real purpose of the debate. Second, the argument-that is, to prove the argument (our point of view) to establish sub-arguments to support our point of view. There should not be too few arguments, otherwise the foundation is unstable and it is difficult to support a tree; Not too much, or the front is too long to care about the beginning and the end. Generally, 3~4 is better, forming a tripartite confrontation. As a sub-argument, first of all, it should be impeccable and tenable. The argument is to support the point of view, and the argument itself is full of loopholes. Instead of supporting opinions, it will become a burden and become the object of attack by the other side. Secondly, the more directly the argument supports the viewpoint, the better. For example, if you argue that something is an egg, your argument is "it is round", which is too far from the point. Although it can be argued, it is too indirect. If your argument is "this thing is born by a hen", it is very direct. Third, argumentation-that is, the process of proving opinions with sufficient arguments through strict reasoning. The argument must meet two conditions: 1, and the argument is sufficient and powerful; 2. The logic of the demonstration process is strict; Let's talk about the first point, "the argument is fully powerful." I don't know if you are a university or a middle school. If you have learned to write a thesis, you should know that arguments are divided into factual arguments and rational arguments. Factual arguments are objective facts, and rational arguments are recognized theoretical viewpoints. As far as the debate is concerned, it can include: axioms, good customs, famous sayings and aphorisms, laws and regulations, views on our government and so on. "Sufficient" means having a certain amount. Of course, the more the better, but you can't hang yourself from a tree. More important is "strength". What is strength? Directly-directly proved the point of view; Authority-including two meanings, one is the opinion of authoritative departments or people, and the other is the long-term recognition of the public; The second point is that "the logic of the argumentation process is rigorous". It doesn't matter if you haven't studied logic. Because of the tight rhythm, fierce confrontation and low logic rigor in the debate, there is no time to carefully scrutinize whether your logic is rigorous. As long as you solve the problem, demonstrate and demonstrate in the above way, there will be no obvious logical problems. One of the most common problems for beginners is self-contradiction and hypothetical argument. In most cases, self-contradiction is due to the inconsistency of ideas among debaters, inadequate preparation or the appearance of "ghosts" who like to be unconventional, which leads to contradictions and inconsistencies among debaters. Hypothetical argument refers to "if …", "maybe …" and "if …" in the process of argument. Your hypothesis proves nothing. Adequate preparation is the key to winning the game. Of course, the process of repeated speculation is extremely painful. Sometimes when fighting with yourself, it is easy to feel split personality, and it is also a tedious job to find a lot of information. But as long as you are patient, you will certainly benefit and improve. It is also my humble opinion to talk about the experience in the competition. I don't know if it will help. First, the determination of the outcome. Generally, the jury judges the outcome from two aspects: debate and team (of course, I mean the judges who have more knowledge and experience in the debate). Argumentation: whether the viewpoint is clear, whether the argument is rigorous, whether the proof is powerful and whether the argument is sufficient. In a word, have you really proved the correctness of your point of view? Team: whether the debaters cooperate tacitly, whether the language is clear and fluent, and whether the manners are generous and decent. Second, the debater. Debate is a battle with language as a weapon. But this does not mean that players can fight without fear. That was a quarrel, not an argument. A good debater, whether winning or losing, will be respected by everyone. This is the debater's personality charm, not his quarrelling ability. As a debater, there are some taboos that must be observed:1-don't insult and abuse each other; 2- Don't talk about each other's privacy, school debates are often well known and easy to happen; 3- Never leave the debate seat; 4- Don't use insulting gestures, such as pointing your finger at each other. This situation is most likely to happen when novices debate freely. If you need to point at the other person, you should use a gesture like "please", just put your palms together and reach out to the other person. Use Mandarin as much as possible. In the formal debate, dialects are ignored by the other side and the judges except as arguments; 6- avoid screaming, dancing, spitting and other situations that damage the image. Third, how to have a free debate. Free debate is the most intense moment of conflict between the two sides, often the moment of winning or losing, and also the moment when novices are most likely to make mistakes. Let's focus on it 1-stick to your point of view and don't be led by the other side. When a novice enters the stage of free debate, the most common mistake is to forget his own argument and be led by the other side. Whether it is free debate, presentation or question and answer, it is to prove one's point of view, refute the other's point of view, and mainly to prove one's point of view. Don't forget that once the other party keeps asking questions, it will be at a loss and it will be very passive to deal with the other party's problems. 2- Ask questions. Most of the questions of free debate are prepared in advance. If you think that all those wonderful questions are improvised by the players, you are all wet. These problems are fully prepared, carefully scrutinized and carefully organized before the game. When preparing, you should try to answer yourself first, guess how the other person might answer if you can, and ask further questions according to the answer. Both sides of the debate can ask such questions. If you can't figure it out, it means that you haven't found the right method, which is determined by the characteristics of the debate (both sides can distinguish it). Ask questions. If you can't answer them, you'll be fine. You must continue to ask further questions. The party who asks questions often holds the initiative. If the other party refuses to answer and asks questions repeatedly, don't forget to say "Ask your opponent for the x time, ……": P3-Answer. Answer each other's questions, don't be confused by each other. After reading the above paragraph, you should feel that the questions carefully prepared by the other party are inevitably difficult to answer. Excellent questions are even arguments for each other's views. Once you answer them, you will prove each other instead. What should we do? First of all, we should remember that "proving our point of view is the first priority". When answering, we should also use our arguments and arguments as much as possible. Secondly, we should get a clear view of the clouds and find the fault of the other party's question from the root. Finally, we really find it difficult to answer. Leave him alone. When the other person asks again, he will say, "We have answered this question clearly, so we won't repeat it because of time." Sorry, another teammate ... "... Of course, a competent judge knows at a glance that you lost this time, but the debate can't care about the gains and losses of one city and one village, and the final victory is the key. 4- Wrong number. Finding out the opponent's loopholes may be the debater's favorite thing to do, which is endless fun and often wins a full house:) However, a pair of keen ears can't be practiced in a day or two, and it needs constant practice. Give a few common examples, logical error: the argumentation process of the opposing team is not rigorous and inconsistent, which is a fundamental error. If it is found out, it will take a batch to the end, especially in the case of contradictions between the opposing sides. Common sense mistakes: The other party has made common sense mistakes and must not let them go. Here is a wonderful example: 1993 International Debate Competition for College Students, a contestant from Cambridge University put forward "Singapore President Lee Kuan Yew ……" and asked the other side to explain. Jiang Changjian of Fudan University immediately pointed out, "Lee Kuan Yew is the prime minister of Singapore, not the president. "The audience applauded, and the other party was humiliated. Debate contest is a high-tech competition. In the course of the competition, debaters will also use sophistry, stealing concepts, stealing pillars, beating about the bush, paying attention to this and that, etc., to point out the tricks of their opponents, which is of course very popular. However, these techniques are often improvised. Without that team, you are going to argue before the game. Practicing these skills was not done in a day. Of course, it is not so easy to find out such a problem. In short, by participating in the debate competition and practicing at ordinary times, the debate skills will be obviously improved, which is also helpful to the individual's critical thinking ability and language control ability. I won't discuss it here. (I have been writing for more than 2 hours, so hot ~ ~ ~) I suggest you watch more debate games, watch the videos of the games and learn the methods of debate; You have to read the written materials repeatedly to know how the master prepared and demonstrated. I really can't write any more, but my heart is eager to help you. Hee hee ~ finally, talk about your topic in detail and give some ideas for reference only. Professor: We should do what we should do. Pro: We should do what we like, because you didn't say whether you are pro or anti-pro, but only did the comprehensive question: 1, "we"-the word is extremely important, but it is the most easily overlooked. The argument says "we" instead of "people", which shows that the proposer has given a target group for discussion, not everyone. Therefore, only within this range is a reasonable debate, otherwise it is beside the point. What does "we" mean depends on the identity of the landlord; Give a simple example to illustrate the importance of this problem: suppose the landlord is a middle school student, and give an example opposite: "Mr. Qi Baishi became a master of Chinese painting because he developed his hobby, gave up his original life and did what he liked." Founder can immediately refute: "Qi Baishi began to learn painting at the age of 42. Is he still a middle school student? "His condition can't prove this argument at all." We all know that "should" and "like" are not completely opposite. There are many things that should be done, which does not necessarily mean that you don't like it. Just like sleeping, everyone has to sleep, and basically everyone likes to sleep. Therefore, the contradictory focus of this debate lies in the two categories of "should it be" and "should it be". If the other party gives an example of a gray area, refute it immediately; At the same time, we can skillfully use the middle area and play the edge ball, especially the other side, because this debate is very unbalanced and the other side is very unfavorable. It is necessary to talk about this debate. This proposition itself made a serious mistake: the wife was too lax; The opposing view is that "we should do what we like". Please pay attention to what "should" means. -It should be! On the one hand, you say that you should do what you like, but on the other hand, you argue that you should not do what you should do, so you should still do what you like? The second aspect of inaccuracy is the intersection of two viewpoints, which violates the principle of "either one or the other" in the debate. The third aspect is "we", and the definition is too vague. Everyone has multiple identities. What are we? Student? Boys? Girls? Middle school students? College students? A man? Children? I don't know. It fully shows that the questioner is extremely amateur and doesn't know much about the debate, or doesn't know at all. It's just a superficial problem I care about. Judging from the reaction to the debate, it is speculated that the most likely teacher is probably a middle school teacher, and the questioner subconsciously supports the positive. I don't say this to attack the questioner, but I hope the landlord can deeply understand this argument and thus understand the questioner's intention. On the other hand, on the one hand, I avoid loopholes in the debate, on the other hand, I make use of them. Okay, I can't write anymore. Good luck to you. Please let me know if you have any questions to discuss. You can keep in touch. References:

Exhausted and original ~