ERIC Number: ED220895
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1982-Nov-5
Reference Count: 0
A Judicial Paradigm for the Evaluation of Debates.
Because legal argument shares many of the characteristics of academic debate, it can serve as a paradigm for evaluating debates. Like debate, legal argument is bilateral, the judge is external to the deliberation and excluded from raising his or her own arguments, and reasons have been developed for assigning presumption, determining the wording of a policy, and defining terms. Legal argument has also been dealt with in depth by argumentation experts and addresses many of the issues of debate. Although not perfect, this analogy can be used to develop guidelines for judging academic debate. A judge could apply the following seven implications: (1) resolution could best be viewed as a court views the title of a piece of legislation; (2) presumption could be used as a tie-breaker; (3) once advocacy begins, only one position should be allowed per advocate; (4) the implications of present decisions on future cases should be recognized; (6) judicial attitude should stress openmindedness and impartiality; and (7) ethical rules should play a stronger role. (JL)
Publication Type: Opinion Papers; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association (68th, Louisville, KY, November 4-7, 1982).