Rebuttal Session
Note
Why is so important?
1. Determine the winner (in close debate)
2. Increase the winning margin (in clear debate)
Structure of Rebuttal
• It Also A – R – E – L
So
• When you rebut…
Only Give Assertion bad
Providing Counter-evidence ok
Counter Reasoning good
Counter Ideas best
Types of Rebuttal
Type Parts
Direct Invalidity
Mitigation
Indirect Comparison
Invalidity
Just Ask: Is it True?
THW ban video games with brutal
and immoral violence setting
Point Invalidity Rebuttal
A: Brutal and immoral setting 1st : They are exposed to more
naturalizes violence for users violence than ever before
through other things such as TV,
R: Youths love playing these games.
When they see and play these movies, and internet, but crime
games, they will think that violence is is getting lower and there is less
common and acceptable, so they bullying and school fighting
will choose to be violent when they than ever before. So, seeing
have problems with others, leading violence does not cause
them to develop trait of easily
violence.
harming other
When to use Invalidity?
• Identify if:
1. There is not enough information to reach an informed
conclusion (e.g. violence in video games causing actual
violent behavior).
2. It is likely that a different factor is causing the problem
proposition has identified (i.e. X is not causing Y; therefore,
stopping X won’t stop Y).
3. The mechanism will actually worsen the problem in the
argument (e.g. increasing prison sentences to lower crime
longer sentences mean someone is more likely to kill witnesses
to avoid being caught)
Mitigation
Just Ask: Is it Very True/Important?
THW ban video games with brutal
and immoral violence setting
Point Mitigation Rebuttal
A: Brutal and immoral setting 2nd : Youths have numerous
naturalizes violence for users influencers to be violent. Even if
the games might be one of
R: Youths love playing these games.
When they see and play these them, parents, teachers, and
games, they will think that violence is friends are far more significant
common and acceptable, so they in determining whether they will
will choose to be violent when they be violent. So, banning games
have problems with others, leading has little, if any, impact on
them to develop trait of easily
violent behaviour.
harming other
When to use Mitigation?
• This rebuttal can be used after invalidity and when:
1. Very few people are affected (e.g. the poor in banning junk
food debate).
2. The people opponents are trying to help will not be affected
(i.e. other alcoholics in “THW deny liver transplant to
alcoholics” debate).
3. The effect will be insignificant (e.g. prostitutes and clients in
“THW ban prostitution” debate)
Comparison
Ask: Why are my arguments more important?
THW ban video games with brutal
and immoral violence setting
Point Comparison
A: Brutal and immoral setting 3rd: Even if there is some violent
naturalizes violence for users influence, banning would
diminish the right and
R: Youths love playing these games.
When they see and play these enjoyment of millions of people.
games, they will think that violence is Because we have proven that
common and acceptable, so they there is likely no impact on
will choose to be violent when they children but it reduces
have problems with others, leading happiness of million others, our
them to develop trait of easily
argument is more important.
harming other
When Using Comparison,
• Consider qualitative and quantitative dimensions:
1. Qualitative (e.g. human right, safety, education,
democracy).
2. Quantitative (i.e. the number of people affected, the cost of
the solution).
Other way to Rebut?
Rebut based on the Types of Argument
Urgency Argument
Patterns Rebuttal
Prove:
1. What is SQ & harm(s)? 1. The harm(s) doesn’t exist or
2. SQ solution(s)? exaggerated; and/or
3. How the motion solves? 2. There are other ways to
minimize the harm; and/or
3. The motion does not solve the
problem(s)
THW ban the sale of clothes made
from fur
Argument Rebuttal
Urgency 1. The cruelty is not really a problem
1. The cruelty to animals as people have been cruel all the
time like eating them & the animals
where animals are skinned
are skinned after death
just for human fashion 2. We can regulate ways of
2. - taking the fur to ensure the
3. Banning the sale of the animals do not suffer
clothes would mean no 3. Banning would just make the black
one would skin the animals market sale of these clothes
because there is demand
THW ban alcohol advertising
Argument Rebuttal
Urgency 1. The overconsumption is not
1. The ads leads to really a problem as people
overconsumption can balance with sports, etc
dependency, etc 2. We can regulate society
2. - about consumption and
3. Banning ads would reduce restrict the ads instead of
the impact of the banning it
consumption 3. -
Justification Argument
Patterns Rebuttal
Prove:
1. What is right/responsibility? 1. The right/responsibility doesn’t
2. Where is it from? exist; and/or
3. Why is it important? 2. The right/responsibility trumps
other right/responsibility (thus
not justified); and/or
3. The right/responsibility leads
to unacceptable impact
THS the right to die
Argument Rebuttal
1. People can speak and 1. The right doesn’t exist because the
silence, vote and not vote. people decide to die as a result of
pressure due to certain problems,
If people have right to live,
not their pure intention. Moreover,
so must the right to die. people can do 2 things alternately,
2. - but not with life and death.
3. The right ensures that 2. -
people won’t have to feel 3. Once people die, they would lose
the hardness of living their all other rights.
life.
THW criminalize hate speech
Argument Rebuttal
1. People have right to be 1. -
free from offensive speech 2. People also have right their opinion
of a particular person who may
which is psychologically
disadvantage the person uttering
harmful the speech. The truth of such
2. - speech should be verified later. If it
3. The speech triggers is wrong, the person can be jailed.
discomfort and persuade But if it’s true, people have sole right
people to hate the person to express it.
3. -
targeted.
Harm/Benefit Argument
Patterns Rebuttal
Prove:
1. Situation before 1. The harm/benefit will not
harm/benefit? happen; and/or
2. Situation after 2. Even if it happens, the effect
harm/benefit? is insignificant; and/or
3. Why such harm/benefit 3. The harm/benefit can not be
important? accepted or comparatively
less important
THW deny liver transplant to
alcoholics
Argument Rebuttal
1. Many alcoholics still. 1. Other alcoholics won’t be
2. Other alcoholics will be deterred because they have been
addicted and can’t easily stop.
deterred because they will
2. Even if there is, it will only influence
know the consequences of small number of people because
liver cancer and not get people usually stop bad habit only
the transplant when serious diseases attack.
3. It sends strong message 3. The alcoholics will ultimately die
that the lifestyle is bad and unnecessarily because they are
unable to access the transplant.
may save more alcoholics.
THW do away the pension scheme
for civil servants
Argument Rebuttal
1. Many people wanna be 1. People will still want to be CS
CS because: a) It’s not easy to look for
job outside or to start a business; b)
2. Now, less people want it
passionate people like teachers
since they have to sacrifice would still be there because of
much of their time serving their passion.
country without any 2. Only few people will be affected.
benefits in the long run. 3. -
3. Less people serving our
country.
THW apply capital punishment
Argument Rebuttal
1. Keeping a murderer in 1. -
prison for life will cost 2. -
millions of dollar. 3. The state must always
2. Death penalty saves preserve life and life is always
state’s money because we more important than money.
don’t have to feed them Even if the money can be used
all their life in prison. to help others, the state can’t
3. The money can be used to justify killing one person to help
help society. others.
Other forms of Rebuttal
1. Contradiction
2. Strawman
3. Slippery Slope
4. Appeal to tradition/culture
5. The Same or Worse Effect (not mutually exclusive arg)
Contradiction
THW ban smoking
Opp Argument Rebuttal
1. We don’t have to ban. We 1. If they want to glorify the idea
can regulate such as by of smoking right, why would
imposing sin tax or they restrict people to
restricting the access to purchase cigarette anyway?
buy cigarette in a day. This It’s contradictive.
policy still ensures the right
of citizens to smoke.
THW apply death penalty
Gov Argument Rebuttal
1. We should apply this to 1. If they don’t care of dying,
discourage serial killers. why will they be discouraged
Serial killers are crazy by death penalty?.
psychopaths who do not
care about living or dying.
Strawman
THW ban smoking
Opp Argument Rebuttal
1. Individual have the right to [Opp’s response]: Government
bodily integrity & the state has been strawmanning. They
should only intervene if the
did not engage with our rights
person lacks the capacity to
make decisions in their own analysis and ignored that we
best interests. For example, if acknowledged that the
the person has a mental government had a limited
disorder or a form of severe right to intervene when a
addiction. person was incapable of
2. [Gov’s response]: Opposition
following what is in their best
says that people can do
whatever they want with their interests.
bodies but we ban illegal drugs
so this is not true.
Slippery Slope
THW ban cosmetic surgery
Opp Argument Rebuttal
1. If the government ban 1. There is no conclusive
cosmetic surgery, pretty evidence to link banning
soon all beauty products cosmetic surgery to an
will be banned. evitable ban of all beauty
products.
Appeal to Tradition/Culture
THW remove the pension scheme for
civil servants
Gov Argument Rebuttal
1. Many civil servants today 1. The case only happens in small
are lazy and they don’t number and in our country.
work maximally to serve Many civil servants in other
people like teachers in develop and developing
school or people working world do not do that. They
in civic department when work efficiently.
we want to make identity
card.
THW ban cosmetic surgery
Gov Argument Rebuttal
1. Cosmetic surgery does not 1. Just because something is new
exist until the mid-20th or different, does not mean
century, so why do we that it doesn’t have any merit.
need it?
Has Same/Worse Effect
THW apply death penalty
Argument Rebuttal
1. Keeping a murderer in 1. The death penalty doesn’t
prison for life will cost save money. The state have
millions of dollar. to spend lots more money on
2. Death penalty saves appeals as most prisoners
state’s money because we sentenced to death spend
don’t have to feed them many years on death row.
all their life in prison.
3. The money can be used to
help society.
Conclusion
When you rebut, think of the questions from 1-6:
1. Is the argument relevant?
2. Is the argument true?
2. Is the argument as true as they said?
3. Is the argument contradictive to another argument?
4. Is the argument important?
5. Why is your argument more important?
Strategic Concession
