Summary: 1. Arguments are based on truth and relevancy. Relevancy is based on the context of arguments. Therefore taking time to frame the context makes the argument a lot more persuasive. 2. The context is up for grabs -- there is no clear context in which debates exist. 3. Good POIs take framing into account, because in the short amount of time you can launch a POI, it's easier to disprove an argument's relevancy than to disprove its truth. 4. Judges love clear contributions.
0:43 - Introduction. 6:09 - Example 1 - This House Would Create Schools for LGBT individuals 9:40 - Example 2 - This House Would Criminalise the paying of ransoms. 16:26 - Example 3 - This House Would Ban media coverage of school shootings. 23:53 - Advice on POIs 26:15 - Advice on Right-wing take on Welfare debates 30:35 - Framing practice with motion "THW only give development aid to countries that introduce a minimum wage for workers"
My word - so much sense from someone so young. This chap really knows his stuff and is so articulate. He should be framing the Education syllabus so that we can have articulate, persuasive youngsters leaving schools and universities.
Generally speaking, students understand something better the second time it's explained to them. Not to say that this isn't a great talk, but just that even if your teacher's explanation was shit, the fact you got thinking about it beforehand inherently makes the explanation easier to get to grips with, and this effect means that the second quick explanation you get about something always sounds smarter and easier to understand even if the first explanation actually did all the legwork.
Hi guys! I would like to know if you could open this video for translation. I'm from Brazil and I believe there are lots of people here in my country that would enjoy this video but don't know english. (I candidate myself for translation haha)
KIM, you also need to point out your opponent's bullshit framing, I adj a debate for "THW Build a wall over the border", Gov literally framed the wall as an "imaginative wall" and is purely metaphorical, OPP never pointed it out and flew with it
Unfortunately, I can barely understand him. He talks too fast and his accent is strong.I'm not sure if it's worth watching when I can only understand 2/3 of the words in a sentence,
Slow down the video through settings and recognize that the audio quality itself is quite poor. He does not speak too fast and even if he did you should learn from him when he is a wildly successful university-level debater. As for his accent, that is simply his accent and to say the video is probably not worth watching because of his accent is a problematic claim.
@@kdramaloverboy6223 I have nothing against those that enjoy it, but you have to admit that it doesn’t actually DO anything. It is all a performance as opposed to getting to the actual truth of a matter.
@@ShuffleboardJerk Yep. The whole concept of framing as presented here is basically about choosing the problem that would make your solution most relevant, rather than determining what the most likely problem actually is and then choosing your solution based on that. Basically the opposite of how science works. At the very least, it's useful for seeing how dishonest arguments operate.
