CHAPTER XII
DEBATING
The Ideal of Debating. A long time ago so admirable a man as William Penn stated the high ideal of all real debating whether practised in the limited range of school interests or in the extended field of life's activities.
In all debates let truth be thy aim, not victory, or an unjust interest; and endeavor to gain, rather than to expose thy antagonist.
The quotation states exactly the true aim of all debating--the conclusion of the right, the truth rather than the securing of a decision over an opponent. The same rules which animate the true lover of sports, the clear distinction which is instilled into all
## participants of amateur athletics of the meanings and significance of
the two terms _sportsman_ and _sport_, can be carried over to apply to school activities in debating. Honest differences of opinion among people upon countless questions will always furnish enough material for regular debating so that no one need ever do violence to his convictions.
Value of Debate. One of the greatest educational values of practice in debate is that the ability it develops can be applied instantly in the life beyond the schoolroom, that it operates in every person's daily life. There are differences in the manner in which debating is carried on in the two places, but practice in the earlier will result in skill and self-confidence in the second.
Debate in Actual Life. The most marked difference between debates in the two phases of life is the difference of form. In academic circles debate is a well-regulated game between matched sides. In actual life only in certain professions are the rules well defined. In most cases the debating is disguised under different forms, though the essential purposes and methods are the same.
Debate between lawyers in courts--technically termed pleading--is the most formal of all professional debating. Its regulations are found in the stabilized court procedure which every lawyer must master and obey.
Much looser than the formal debate of the court room is the speech-making of the legislative organization from the lowest township board meeting up to the Senate of the United States. Of course the members of such bodies are regulated by certain restrictions, but the speeches are not likely to be curbed in time as are academic performances, nor are the speakers likely to follow a prearranged order, nor are they always equally balanced in number, nor do they agree so carefully upon "team work." Sometimes in a legislative body the first speaker may be on the negative side, which is quite contrary to all the rules of regularly conducted debates. All the speakers may also be on one side of a measure, the opposing side not deigning to reply, resting secure in the knowledge of how many votes they can control when the real test of power comes.
Most informal of all are the general discussions in which business matters are decided. In these the speeches are never so set as in the two preceding kinds. The men are less formal in their relations and addresses to one another. The steps are less marked in their changes. Yet underneath the seeming lack of regulation there is the framework of debate, for there is always present the sense of two sides upon every proposition, whether it be the purchase of new office equipment for a distant agent, an increase of salary for employees, or the increase of capitalization. Certain speakers support some proposition. Others oppose it until they are convinced and won over to the affirmative side, or until they are out-voted.
Two men seated in an office may themselves be debaters, audience, and judges of their own argumentative opinions. They may in themselves fill all the requirements of a real debate. They deliver the speeches on the affirmative and negative sides. Each listens to the arguments of his opponent. And finally, the pair together give a decision upon the merits of the arguments presented.
On all such occasions the speakers need and use just those qualities which classroom training has developed in them--knowledge of material, plan of presentation, skill in expression, conviction and persuasion of manner, graceful acceptance of defeat.
Debating Demands a Decision. Debating goes one step farther than merely argumentative speaking. Debating demands a decision upon the case, it requires a judgment, a registered action. Again in this respect it is like a game.
EXERCISES
1. Make a list of propositions which have been debated or might be debated in a courtroom.
2. Make another list of propositions which have been debated or might be debated in legislative bodies.
3. Make a list of propositions which might be debated in business.
4. As far as is possible, indicate the decisions upon them.
5. Choose some proposition on which there is considerable difference of opinion in the class. Make a list of those who favor and those who oppose. Speak upon the proposition, alternating affirmative and negative.
6. Discuss the speeches delivered in the fifth exercise.
Persons Involved in a Debate. Who are the persons involved in a regular debate? They are the presiding officer, the speakers themselves, the audience, the judges.
The Presiding Officer. Every debate has a presiding officer. The Vice-President of the United States is the presiding officer of the Senate. The Speaker is the presiding officer of the House of Representatives. If you will refer to