W11 Rebuttals | Rule of Law & Fairness in Society

IF YOU ARE NEW HERE

Welcoming Remarks

Welcome back to class, everyone! If this is your first class, we’re very excited to meet you! Before moving on to our lesson, let’s all introduce ourselves

Tell us your: Name

Age

Favourite Subject

Fantastic! Now that we all know each other, we are ready to embark on an exciting journey of learning.

Along the way, you will discover new ideas, practice thinking on your feet, build your confidence when speaking in front of an audience, and develop your critical thinking skills.

Expectations

1

2

Thrilling activities awaits The activities will keep you on the edge of your seat!

3 Give awesome speeches!

We'll have a chance to speak up and get helpful feedback!

Active participation

I'll call on your wacky ideas to make this class extra special.

HOUSE RULES FOR EVERYONE

Class Rules to make this a fantastic experience for all!

Now that we all know each other, let’s make this class into a proper classroom!

Here are some rules that we will all follow together:

Before Class

1. 2.

Makesurethatyou’veeatenbreakfast/lunchandhavegonetothe bathroom

JointheZoomcallafewminutesbeforeclassstartssowecanget startedrightaway!

At the Start of Class

Letyourcoachknowifyouneedtoleaveclassearly 1. 2.

Turnyourcameraonsowecanseeyourlovelysmile!

During Class

1. 2. 3. 4.

Keep your camera on unless you are preparing during an activity

Put your hand up if you want to say something

Do not leave your computer during class - if you need to go to the bathroom, put your hand up and ask your coach before you go Immediately unmute yourself and reply when you are called on

INTRODUCTION

Welcome, aspiring champions of justice! Today, we're embarking on a quest to master the art of argumentation in the pursuit of fairness. From dissecting the types of rebuttals to unraveling the intricacies of rebutting contradictions, we're gearing up to become formidable advocates for the rule of law. So, brace yourselves for an exhilarating journey into the heart of substantive argument structure, where every point counts in the fight for justice!

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

CLASS ROADMAP

NOT FAIR!!!

Warm Up Activity

Purpose of a Rebuttal

Types of Rebuttals

THE RIGHT RESPONSE Activity

ARGUMENT STRU

REBUTTAL STR

UCTURE VS RUCTURE

ODD ONE OUT Activity

What is a Contradiction Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure 3

FIGHTING BACK Activity

ECTIVES:

By the end of today’s class, you’ll learn:

The basic rules of justice in our society

The general structure of a rebuttal

Types of rebuttals

Different ways to tailor that rebuttal structure to specific parts of an argument

WARM UP ACTIV

NOT FAIR!!!

NOT FAIR!!!

Warm Up Activity

Purpose of a Rebuttal

Types of Rebuttals

THE RIGHT RESPONSE Activity

REBUTTAL STR

ARGUMENT STRU

REBUTTAL STR

VITY

UCTURE VS RUCTURE

What is a Contradiction Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

ODD ONE OUT Activity

FIGHTING BACK Activity

Not fair!!!

Warm up Activity

Time Given

5 mins: Discuss

Activity Instructions

Tell us about a time when you thought that something was unfair– someone cutting in line, having to do more work than others on a group project, or not being able to go with friends somewhere.

How did you react? If you didn’t say anything at the time, explain why you thought the situation was unfair.

RULE OF LAW |

PART 1:

REBUTTALS 101

NOT FAIR!!!

Warm Up Activity

Purpose of a Rebuttal

Types of Rebuttals Key takeaway

THE RIGHT RESPONSE Activity

Now that we’ve learned all about how to make good, persuasive arguments, let’s learn how to knock ‘em down! To do this, we must learn all about ‘rebuttals.’

Purpose of a Rebuttal

Rebuttal is a response to another person’s argument or speech. When you debate, you need to do two things:

1.

Build up your own case by providing arguments about why you are right

2.

Weakening the opponent’s case by attacking their points

It’s important when you do rebuttal to respond to the person’s a not to attack them personally!

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Here are some examples of how not to rebut:

1.

"You clearly don't understand the topic. Your argument is laughable."

2.

“Your speech was boring and unconvincing. Nobody cares about what you have to say.”

3.

"You're just wrong. My argument is way better than yours."

Why do you think these are not good rebuttals?

Types of Rebuttals

Direct Rebuttal

This is when you directly say why you think the other person's argument is wrong. You might show evidence or explain your own ideas to prove them wrong. It's like saying, "Nope, that's not right, and here's why!"

Example: if someone says that rules are unnecessary because they limit freedom, a direct rebuttal would be explaining how rules are needed because they actually create fairness and protect everyone in society.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Types of Rebuttals

Mitigation

This is when you agree a little bit with what the other person said, but you also try to make it seem less important. It's like saying, "Yeah, maybe a little bit, but it's not as bad as you think!"

Example: if someone argues that punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, you might agree that sometimes it seems strict, but you could explain how it helps maintain order and fairness in society.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Types of Rebuttals

Weighing

This is when you compare different ideas and say which ones are more important. It's like deciding what matters most in a debate. You might say, "Sure, that's important, but this other thing is even more important because..."

Example: If someone argues that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want without consequences, you might acknowledge that freedom is important, but you could argue that fairness for everyone in society are even more important because that’s how we ensure safety and make sure that people’s rights are protected. You can respond to someone's argument in different ways. You can directly say why you think they're wrong, agree a little but make it seem less important, or compare different ideas to show which ones matter most.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

The Right Response

Activity

Time Given

7 mins: Discuss

Activity Instructions

Identify which type of rebuttal would be most appropriate for each given statement

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

The Right Response

Activity

Guidelines & Directions

1. Statement: "Laws should be abolished because they restrict our freedom."

2. Statement: "The justice system is flawed because it sometimes punishes innocent people "

3. Statement: "Ensuring swift punishment for criminals is more important than strictly adhering to due process.

4 Statement: "Punishments for minor offenses should be eliminated because they're too harsh.

Due Process

Due process means following the rules when dealing with people in the law. It includes things like carrying out police investigations properly, telling people what they're accused of, giving them a chance to defend themselves, and having a fair trial.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Activity The Right Response

Answers:

1. Statement: "Laws should be abolished because they restrict our freedom."

Response: Direct rebuttal - Explain why laws are necessary for people to enjoy freedom– freedom from discrimination, freedom of speech, freedom to practice their religion, etc.

2 Statement: "The justice system is flawed because it sometimes punishes innocent people."

Response: Mitigation - Agree that the justice system has shortcomings but stress that people can appeal for a retrial if they believe the court’s decision is unfair.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Activity The Right Response

Answers:

3 Statement: "Ensuring swift punishment for criminals is more important than strictly adhering to due process.

Response: Weighing - Compare the significance of swiftly punishing criminals to maintaining due process in the legal system Highlight the potential risks of sacrificing due process, such as wrongful convictions and erosion of fundamental rights, against the urgency of addressing crime. Stress the need to balance efficiency with fairness in the pursuit of justice.

4. Statement: "Punishments for minor offenses should be eliminated because they're too harsh.

Response: Mitigation - Acknowledge that punishments can sometimes be severe, but emphasize the importance of maintaining consequences for wrongdoing to deter future offenses and uphold fairness.

To discourage or prevent someone from doing something by instilling fear of the consequences. For example, the presence of security cameras might deter thieves from breaking into a store.

PART 2:

BASIC STRUCTURE OF A REBUTTAL

NOT FAIR!!!

Warm Up Activity

Purpose of a Rebuttal

REBUTTAL STR

ARGUMENT STRU

Types of Rebuttals Question

REBUTTAL STR

THE RIGHT RESPONSE Activity

Rebuttal Structure

When making a rebuttal, we can’t just randomly say something is wrong. We need to be organized so that the judge and audience understand our thought process. Here are steps we can take to make clear rebuttals:

1. Pinpoint

quickly refer to the other person’s argument. This is so the judge knows what part of their speech you are talking about. You want to keep this short, because you want to save your time for actually responding!

2. Reasoning

explain why their point isn’t true. The best rebuttal has multiple reasons that attack the point in different ways

3. Summarise explain to the judge what it means for the debate, now that their point doesn’t stand.

Rebuttal Structure

Example

“The second speaker says that everyone who commits a crime should be put in jail for life. This isn’t a good idea, because it isn’t a proportionate punishment - you shouldn’t get the same punishment for stealing food for your family as you would for murdering someone. People should have a chance to learn from their mistakes and re-enter society after their punishment. Because of this, jailing everyone for life would be bad for justice.”

To win a debate, you need to rebut the other speaker’s arguments. You do so by quickly addressing their argument, and then giving multiple reasons why it isn’t true.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Argument Structure vs Reb Structure

The basic structure of a rebuttal is to pinpoint, reason, then su this next part, we will be applying the same general format, bu specific part of an argument.

What is the premise of an argument?

The premise of an argument is the logical foundation on whic the argument is built. The premise is used to give logica support to the outcome of the argument. In short, if you tak the premise away from the argument it will not make an sense.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

buttal

ummarize. In

ut to attack a

Argument Structure vs Rebuttal Structure

Imagine you are constructing a building

Imagine you want to build the tallest skyscraper possible. B the taller it gets, the harder it becomes to keep it standin That's why you have to build the strongest possible foundati for the building to stand tall. The argument is the skyscraper a the premise is the foundation. A skyscraper will collapse witho a foundation and an argument will collapse without a stro premise.

Argument Structure vs Rebuttal Structure

Exam

People w but rathe

ple:

who commit minor offenses should not face prison time

er community service.

Minor Offenses

Minor offenses typically refer to less serious violations of the law, often characterized by their relatively low level of harm or impact on society. These offenses may include infractions such as petty theft, vandalism, disorderly conduct, or minor drug possession. They are typically distinguished from more serious crimes like violent assault, robbery, or drug trafficking. Punishments for minor offenses often involve fines, community service, probation, or short-term incarceration.

Argument Structure vs Rebuttal Structure

Argument:

Claim: Minor offenders should not be incarcerated but inste community service.

Premise: Imprisonment for minor offenses often perpetuat poverty and crime, particularly among marginalized communi

Conclusion: Therefore, implementing community service a punishment offers a more rehabilitative approach and fo reintegration.

The premise is the analysis that links the asser conclusion. If you can attack the premise, yo foundation of the argument and therefore it bec

ead assigned

tes cycles of ities.

as a form of osters social

rtion and the ou break the omes invalid.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Argument Structure vs Reb Structure

How to structure rebuttals while attack the premise:

1. Identify the claim

2. Figure out and attack the premise

3. A summary of the rebuttal

Argument Structure vs Rebuttal Structure

1. Identify the claim

quickly refer to the other person’s argument. This is so the judge knows what part of their speech you are talking about. You want to keep this short, because you want to save your time for actually responding!

2. Attack on the premise

However, equating incarceration solely with perpetuating cycles of poverty and crime oversimplifies the complexities of criminal behavior and ignores the importance of deterrence and accountability.

3. Summary of rebuttal

By challenging the premise that imprisonment exacerbates societal issues and advocating for the necessity of punishment as a deterrent, the conclusion advocating for community service loses validity.

Pin the Tail

Activity

Time Given

10 mins: Discuss

Activity Instructions

For each argument, pinpoint which part of it you would like to rebut. Afterwards, provide at least 1 reason why you think it is wrong. Try using the different types of rebuttals to guide you!

Types of Rebuttals

Direct Rebuttal Mitigating Weighing

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Pin the Tail

Activity

Arguments: Argument 1

Claim: Investing in education is crucial for reducing crime rates and promoting social equality.

Reasoning: Education empowers individuals with knowledge, skills, and opportunities, reducing the likelihood of engaging in criminal activities. Furthermore, it fosters social mobility by providing equal access to opportunities for all members of society

Example: Studies have shown that regions with higher levels of education often experience lower crime rates and greater social cohesion. For instance, increased access to quality education in underserved communities has been linked to reduced rates of juvenile delinquency and improved socio-economic outcomes

Linkage: Therefore, prioritizing investment in education initiatives not only promotes individual growth and development but also contributes to the overall well-being and safety of society

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Pin the Tail

Activity

Arguments: Argument 2

Claim: Ensuring police accountability and training is crucial for maintaining public trust and safety

Reasoning: When police officers use intimidation or threats, it undermines public confidence in law enforcement and can escalate tensions within communities. By holding police accountable for their actions and providing comprehensive training on de-escalation techniques and conflict resolution, law enforcement agencies can promote trust and cooperation between officers and the communities they serve.

Example: Instances of police misconduct, including the use of excessive force and intimidation tactics, have led to widespread protests and civil unrest in many cities. For example, the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis sparked nationwide demonstrations against police brutality and systemic racism, highlighting the urgent need for reforms to address issues of accountability and transparency within law enforcement.

Linkage: Therefore, prioritizing measures such as enhanced training programs, body cameras, and civilian oversight boards can help foster accountability and professionalism within police departments, ultimately enhancing public safety and trust in law enforcement.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Pin the Tail

Activity

Arguments:

Argument 3

Claim: Rehabilitation programs are more effective than punitive measures for minor offenders.

Premise: Providing access to rehabilitation programs addresses the root causes of minor offenses, such as poverty, substance abuse, and lack of education or employment opportunities.

Conclusion: By investing in rehabilitation rather than punitive measures, society can reduce recidivism rates and promote the reintegration of minor offenders into the community.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Feedback

I will give you 2 pieces of feedback, which may include comments on

1. Rebuttal reasoning

Choice of idea to rebut

2. Type of rebuttal used

3.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

PART 3:

REBUTING A CONTRADICTION

NOT FAIR!!!

Warm Up Activity

Purpose of a Rebuttal

Types of Rebuttals

THE RIGHT RESPONSE Activity

RUCTURE

UCTURE VS RUCTURE

What is a Contradiction

Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

ODD ONE OUT Activity

FIGHTING

What is a contradiction?

A contradiction happens when someone says two opposite things that can't both be true.

This usually happens when people are “trying to have their cake and eat it too” or have it both ways. So when an argument seems too good to be true, it probably is!

Imagine if someone says "I love dogs, they're the best pets," and then later says, "Dogs are too noisy and I don't like them."

It doesn't match! In a debate, if someone uses a contradiction, it's like they're mixing up their ideas. We need to use ideas that make sense together, like puzzle pieces that fit to complete a bigger picture.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

Following the same general format of a rebuttal structure, here is how we would deal with a contradiction.

1. Pinpoint

2. Explain why

Both cannot be true because

if the first statement is true, then the second statement is false

If the second statement is true, then the first statement is false

3. Summarize

A contradiction hurts the persuasiveness of an argument, but they may not always be readily noticeable to the judge. This is why it is important to it out and explain why it is a contradiction.

Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

Example:

THBT all lawyers should be provided by the government (no one is allowed to select and hire their own lawyer).

Statement 1: Allowing individuals to select and hire their own lawyers perpetuates inequality in legal representation, as those with financial resources can afford high-quality legal services from private law firms, while marginalized groups may lack access to competent representation.

Statement 2: Conversely, mandating that all lawyers be provided by the government ensures equal access to legal representation, promoting fairness in trials and guaranteeing that everyone receives a high-quality defense regardless of their socioeconomic status.

Why do you think these two statements are contradictory? How would you fix the problem?

Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

Rebuttal:

Pinpoint the contradiction: The contradiction arises between the assertion that allowing individuals to choose their own lawyers leads to unequal access to legal representation (Statement 1) and the claim that providing government-assigned lawyers ensures fair trials and higher-quality representation (Statement 2).

Explain why: Both cannot be true because if individuals selecting their own lawyers leads to unequal access to legal representation, as stated in Statement 1, then the assertion in Statement 2 that government-assigned lawyers ensure fair trials and high-quality representation would be false.

Conversely, if providing government-assigned lawyers indeed guarantees fair trials and high-quality representation, as stated in Statement 2, then the concern raised in Statement 1 about unequal access to legal services due to individual selection of lawyers would be unfounded.

Rebutting a Contradiction: Structure

Rebuttal:

Summarize: The contradiction lies in the inconsistency between the two statements: one suggests that individual selection of lawyers leads to inequality, while the other implies that government-provided lawyers ensure fairness and quality. Both statements cannot be simultaneously true, as they present conflicting perspectives on the effectiveness of legal representation.

Odd One Out

Activity

Time Given

5 mins: Discuss

Activity Instructions

For the three statements, identify which one contradicts the other two and explain why

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Activity Odd One Out

Statements

Motion: THBT individuals accused of crimes should have the right to choose their own legal representation rather than being assigned to a government-appointed lawyer.

Statement 1: We should not force people to have government-appointed lawyers because public lawyers are often less competent than private lawyers.

Statement 2: Allowing people to choose between public or private lawyers ensures individuals can find legal representation that best suits their needs. This approach promotes fairness, as both public and private lawyers are well-trained and professional

Statement 3: Assigning everyone to public lawyers will lower the quality of defense for everyone because these lawyers will become overworked.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Odd One Out

Activity

Answer

Motion: THBT individuals accused of crimes should have the right to choose their own legal representation rather than being assigned to a government-appointed lawyer.

Statement 1: We should not force people to have government-appointed lawyers because public lawyers are often less competent than private lawyers.

Statement 2: Allowing people to choose between public or private lawyers ensures individuals can find legal representation that best suits their needs. This approach promotes fairness, as both public and private lawyers are well-trained and professional

Statement 3: Assigning everyone to public lawyers will lower the quality of defense for everyone because these lawyers will become overworked.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Fighting Back

Activity

Time Given

7 mins: Prepare 2-3 mins: Speak

Activity Instructions

You will be assigned to one of the two topics. Each topic will have arguments which you must rebut, following the rebuttal structures that we learned earlier.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Motions:

Fighting Back

Motion 1

THW prohibit the media from reporting on the mental illness of those accused of crimes

Statement 1: The mentally ill will get even more discriminated.

Statement 2: This will be used as an excuse and a tactic to get sympathy.

It will make society think it wasn’t that person’s fault, it was the fault of the illness alone, therefore we should not punish this person, instead focus on helping the person.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Motions:

Activity Fighting Back

Motion 2

THBT employers should be barred from accessing the criminal records of job candidates.

Claim: Employers will not hire people who have a criminal history

Premise: Assessing past criminal records unfairly impacts job seekers, preventing them from securing employment opportunities solely based on their past mistakes

Reasoning: By disregarding past criminal records, employers can focus on candidates' qualifications and skills, promoting fairer hiring practices and providing individuals with the opportunity to reintegrate into society through meaningful employment.

Example: Imagine someone with a mistake who's now skilled and ready to work. If employers see their record, they might not get hired, even if they're perfect for the job.

Linkage: By eliminating the consideration of past criminal records, employers can create a more inclusive and equitable job market, allowing individuals with a history of involvement in the criminal justice system to rebuild their lives through gainful employment.

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

Feedback

I will give you

2 pieces of feedback, which may include comments on:

Type of rebuttal used

1. Persuasiveness of rebuttal

3.

2. Rebuttal structure

RULE OF LAW | FAIRNESS IN SOCIETY

RECAP

Here’s a recap of what we learned today:

1. Types of Rebuttals

Direct Rebuttal: This is when you directly say why you think the other person's argument is wrong.

a. Mitigation: This is when you agree a little bit with what the other person said, but you also try to make it seem less important.

c.

b. Weighing: This is when you compare different ideas and say which ones are more important.

2. Rebuttal Structure

a.

Pinpoint: quickly refer to the other person’s argument. This is so the judge knows what part of their speech you are talking about. You want to keep this short, because you want to save your time for actually responding!

c.

b. Summarise: explain to the judge what it means for the debate, now that their point doesn’t stand.

Reasoning: explain why their point isn’t true. The best rebuttal has multiple reasons that attack the point in different ways

3, If you can attack the premise, you break the foundation of the argument and therefore it becomes invalid.

RECAP

Here’s a recap of what we learned today:

4. Structure of the rebuttal when attacking the premise:

Identify the claim

Figure out and attack the premise

A summary of the rebuttal

5. Rebut a contradiction because these hurt the overall persuasiveness of a case. Don’t let opponents have their cake and eat it too.

6. To go about rebutting a contradiction, follow this structure:

Pinpointa.

Explain that two statements or arguments cannot both be true because b.

ii.

if the first statement is true, then the second statement is false

i. If the second statement is true, then the first statement is false

Summarizec.