NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED084579
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1973-Nov
Pages: 12
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: 0
An Examination of Undefined Forms of Proof in Academic Debate.
Underwood, Willard A.
Although texts on debate and argumentation deal with accepted forms of evidence, reasoning, and logical methods of proof, they do not cover adequately the "undefined" forms of proof. Criteria of evidence found in forensic literature are not always followed strictly by judges, in courtroom or classroom. Many debate judges allow imprecise, vague, or inaccurate reasoning ("non-evidential" proof) the same credibility as more reliable evidence. A more pragmatic definition of evidence should be that it covers anything that influences the outcome of a debate or a trial, including such factors as a speaker's appearance, his manner of presentation, and his persuasive tactics other than use of facts, testimony, or documentation. The outcome can depend also on the attitudes of the judge or jury and their interpretation of the material presented. A knowledge of undefined forms of proof, or non-evidential evidence, will help debaters evaluate their powers of persuasion more realistically. (RN)
Publication Type: N/A
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: N/A
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Assn. (59th, New York City, November 8-11, 1973)