PROPOSITIONS AND WHAT THE PROPOSITION IS It is an expression in words of an act of judgment, It is @ ment of a decision the advocate desires to have others accept or It is expressed in a Complote statement, with a subject and a icates It allows an affirmance and a donials sta’ KINDS OF PROPOSITIONS 1. Proposition of fact is one that is concerned with the truth or falsity of an act of judgnent, It aims at belief. It settles the question: "Is this assertion true?" 2. Proposition of policy is one that is concerned with the wisdom or unwisdom, the expediency or inexpediency, of a course of actions It aims at action. Whoever asserts it has the duty to establish the workable character of his plan. It answers the questions: "Should this ccourse of action: be followed?" "Should it-be done?" 3. Proposition of vaite is one in which the affirmative maintains that a certain thing is good, beneficial, proper, virtuous, or admirable, while the negative maintains the same thing’ts either undesirable or that something clse is better. FOUR STEPS TO BE FOLLOWED IN THE FORMULATION OF PROPOSITIONS 1. One must find out what the real question is, what the facts and ideas are, whose truth or falsity must be decided to settle the questions 2, One must formulate the question in the form of a declarative, positive and complete sencences 3, One must tost the statement by a definition of its terms to find out what it means as it is. In checking the definition, the following rules are to be observed? a) Look for its ordinary acceptation. b) Determine whether it has ordinary, technical or culiar neaning, If the term has a peculiar meaning ask an expert for a special interpretations if scientific, ask a specialist in that particular sciences c) After obtaining the definition try to ask these questions! "Are the tems of the definition exact?"3;" seen Erinn exact?" ;"Are there no exceptions to the Steps a), b), and c) are merely suggested steps, other devices fi ;82 may be employods hye Compare the meaning ef the statenent so expressed with the meaning of the real question. If the statement thus formulated does not tally with what is intended, it has to be modified until the desired effect is hade QUALITIES OF PROPOSITIONS L. It must be debatable or controversiale 2. It must be in the form of an assertions 3. It involves only one central ideas = he It must be susceptible to one interpretation. 5. It places the presumption and the burden of proof in the affirmative. 6. It must not be very broade 7. Tt should avoid abstractions and erfrsistions. 8 It should be unprejudiced, brief, simple and clears 9. It should be interesting. THE DEFINITION OF ISSUE Issue or issues may mean s of opinions and beliefs. Issues may mean the differences of opinions or assertions affirmed by the affirmative and denied by the negatives They are the inherently. vital points, elements, or subpropositionss affirmed by the affirmative dnd denied by the negative, upon the establishment of which depends the establishment of the main proposition. ISSUES IN ARGUMENTATION Issues in argumentation are not simply important main points or points on which there is a clash of opinions but they encompass.the smallest possible divisions ial points, each one of which the stavlish in order to establish the proposition. They are those critical claims inherent in the proposition that the affirmative must establish. may be readily recognized since they aims the answers to which direct. isprave the propasitin ate negative mst defeat at least one isoue in order to win, In general argumentation, the work of explaining and ¢ sae thet a part of to aeae g and defining the issues is already ISSUES OF THE DEBATE © They i yy are those issues on which the debate is actually conductedy aphar ee83 fhe ter Assues Introduced into the debate on which the opposing adveeates TYPES OF ISSUES _ ie Potentialissues are relevant issues to a particular ° position. “They are inherently vital points involved in the propssitian that the affirmative should establish to create a prima facie case. 2. Admittedissues- are those issues that the negative concedes or admits as true and eventually to be dropped out of the controversy. 3» Stookwissues refer to the formula of issues. They are standaxd questions whi ch are applicable to almost any propositions : Tseceigih Letarry 2 3) yl phy tec he Ultimate’ tote IS“the pete Gst4iGnaining in disputes In some debates the clash may narrow down to one wiich remains undecideds DISCOVERING THE ISSUES Steps for finding the issues or test for tentative issues: 1. Thinkingsout - The debater should think about the proposition in all angles. He should ask himself the following Questions: Who wants this? Whose business is it? Who will suffer by 4¢? Who will profit from it? What is it? Are there interests at stake? Eoonomic? Moral? Political? Social? Conmercial? Religious? What do the terms used mean? How many interpretations can be given to the proposition? etce 2s Studying - The debater aside fron studying the meanings attributable to the tems of the proposition must likewise study: a) ‘The history of the question,, its origin and occasion; b) The relevancy of the’proposition with other’ propositions and the present conditions - moral, physical, educational, etc. end other aspects = c) Both eides of the question to determine where the conflict es, what the opponent will maintain, admit or deny. 3. Exeluding,— excludet a) Admitted matters for there is no clash of opinion; b) Irrelevant and unimportant matters; and c) Indirect matters. 4e Selecting - The debater should select the points which willeh, neet.the-test,.of exclusiony such as: a) Points on which there is clash of opinion; b) Relevant points; c) Important points; and d) Direct points,sawn BI ce EVIDENCE bharpeeo THE MEANING OF EVIDENCE “ Evidence 4s defined -as any-matter-oft fact whose effect, tendency, or design is to produce in the mind a persuasion-affirmative or negative-of the existence of some other matter of fact. It is applied to that which tends to’ generate proof or render it evident. It f facts, opinions, and objects that are used to generate proof. The advocate brings together the raw materials, and by the ‘process of reasoning produces new conclusion, It is that which dqnonstrates, makes clear, or ascertains the truth of the point in igsue. It refers to all matters that may be used in creating proof. THE RULES OF EVIDENCE IN GENERAL ARGUMENTATION In general argumentation the rules are: 1. The rule of legal admissibility is not followed but instead what is applied is the rule of logical sufficiency and relevancy; that is a) Whether the evidence is likely to be believed by men in general; or b) Whether it touches upon the matter at issue. 2. The debater should take into account also in the choice of evidence that kind of evidence which: a) Qualifies as sound basis of conviction. b) Generates persuasive appeal; in other words, the evidence must directiy and strongly appeal to the imagination and peculiar emotions of nis hearers or readers. BOURCES OF EVIDENCE 1. Persons are human beings who, possessed of some measure of intelligence, transmit information by word of mouth, in writing, or by voluntary signs. 2, Documents are manuscripts or pieces of printed matters regarded as conveying information or evidence like a marriage contract to prove marriage, the birth certificate to prove the name, date and place of birth of a person, etcy Z Y erence sie 3 Things are tangible objects presented to the sensea“o those who WAIL judgewy, a dmyy, bull ay d kK,88 AMPES OF EVIDENCE 1. Judicial evidence is that evidence which is admissible in courts. otha be abl u ably td ow 2. Extrajudielal evidence is used to satisfy persons abst cae the facts requiring proof in any situation other than a legal proceeding. 3« Written evidence is evidence supplied by writings of all Kinds: books, newspapers and magazines. 4 Unwritten evidence includes both oral testimony and objects offered for personal inspection, Se Primary evidence is one vhich affords the best certainty of the fact in question, 6 Secondary evidence domes from other than the best available sources 2 7 Direct evidence is one from which the principal fact follows without the necessity of inferring. 8, Indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence i8 one from which considering as an evidentiary fact, the fact td be proved follows inmediately from the means of proving it. 9. Real evidence is furnished when objects are placed or exhibited or viewed for inspection by the court. - 10» Personal evidence is one that is afforded by a human being, either in the form of discourse or by voluntary signa for the purpose of communicating his thought. 11, Original evidence is one which has a probative force or weight of its owns 12, Unoriginal evidence or hearsay evidence is one which the witness declares, not from his own personal knowledge but from information given by another or other persons, 13. Lay evidence or ordinary evidence is provided by laymen, that is, persons without any special training, knowledge or experzence in the matter under consideration. Le Expert evidence or opinion evidence is‘providéd by the opinion of a witness regarding a question of science, art or trade when he is skilled therein may be received in evidence,or the oral’ testimony of a witness skilled therein on the written laws of a foreign country or on published books or reports of decisi court of a foreign country. ecaeone CE the 15s Pre-arranged evidence or preappointed evidence is that89 created for the speoitic purpoae of recording cortain information for Geaitie tutwe.references ee 16. Casual evidence 1s evidence created without any effort being made to create it and which is not designed for possible future references le Ve Positive evidence is actual evidences 18, Negative evidence is the absence of that evidence which might reasonably be expected to be found where the issue in question is trues 19. Extraneous evidence is that evidence used to explain or clarify other evidence. 20. Competenb evidence is one not excluded by law in a particular case. 21. Material evidence is directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by the rules of substantive law and pleadings. 22. Relevant evidence is evidence having any value in reasons as tending to prove any matter provable in an action. 23. Demonstrative evidence is one that excludes all possibility of errors 2he Moral evidence is one that attests to the reasonable probability of the truth of the fact in controversy. 25» Satisfactory evidence is one which produces moral certainty or conviction in an unprejudiced mind. 26, Cumulative evidence is an additional evidence of the same kind to the sane pointe 27 Corroborative evidence is an additional evidence of * different character to the same point. 28~ Rebutting evidence is that which is given to repeal, or counteract or disprove facts given in evidence on the other side. 29. Prima facie evidence is an evidence that is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed until and unless overcome by contrary evidences ANE TESTS OF EVIDENCE The following questions constitute the tests of evidence: 1. Is there enough evidence?9 NE 2s Is the evidence eloar? If tho evid ft cleer use the extraneous evidence for clarifications yn? 49 RO f 3+ Is the evidence consiatont with othor knownovidenté? 4e Is the ovidenco consistent with iteclf? 5e Is the evidence verifiable? This question means that the advocate is able to verify his evidence, able to authenticat firm and substantiate it. , © to authenticate, con: 6 Is the source of evidence competent? 7. Is the source of evidence unpre judiced? 8. Is the source of evidence reliable and trustworthy? 9e Is the evidence an index of what we want to know? 10. %Is the evidence statistically sound? 11. Is the evidence the most recently available? . 12. Is the evidence cumulative? nenemc, by milieu atti, 13. Is the evidence consistent with the beliefs of the 14. Is the source of evidence acceptable to the audience? 15. Io the evidence suited to the level of the audience? 16, Is the evidence consistent with the motives of the ~n REASONING ‘THB MEANING OF KEASONING Reasoning 1a the process by which, from cortain truths already known, the mind passes to another truth distinct from these but necessarily following from them. It 4s a process by which the mind is led from one cr more assumed or known truths to acknowledge an alleged truth. It is a process of thought. METHODS OF REASONING 1. THAWCELSHs the process of reasoning whereby from the concurrence or conjunction of particular instances or phenomena we draw a general principle, rule or postulate. It is a form of reasoning in which a general conclusion is drawn from particular instances. 2s Deduction is the process of reasoning whereby it is shown that a particuler case is true because it falls under some general law or principle, which is already known or assumed to be true. The deductive reasoning takes the form of the syllogism. ‘TYPES OF REASONING 1, Reasoning from example’depends for its strength upon the similarity between the case in question and some other case or cases, which are alleged either as analogous to the case in question, or as establishing a general postulate that is applicable to it. It is a form of inductive reasoning and involves either cause or sign reasoning since the advocate secks to show that his examples or cases are causes or signs of the conclusion he presents. 2+ Reasoning by»analogy is reasoning based upon resemblance or_comparison. It consists of making a comparison between two similar cases, and inferring that what is true in one case is true in the other. It is a form of inductive reasoning in which the advocate seeks to show that the factors in his analogy are either the cause or a sign of the conclusion he represents. 3. Catlsal reasoning is one: that infers that a certain fector or a cause is a force that produces something else or an effects Causal reasoning may either be cause-to-effect or effect-to-cause reasonings FORMS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING In deductive reasoning, the particular case is under sone general rule or principle already known or asouee og Tee An example of this process is as follows: Sas All men are mortal.rr corn cane er Pedro is a mans Therefore, Pedro is mortal. The deductive process takes the form of the syllogism. ds»the-act.of thought by which from two given propositions, ses, the arguer proceeds to a third proposition, the truth of which necessarily follows from the truth of these propositions. qo illustrate: MAJOR PREMISE: ALL men are mortal. MINOR PREMISE: Pedro is a man. CONCLUSION: Therefore, Pedro is mortal. ‘The evis an argument in the form of the syllogism in which one of the premises or the conclusion is implied, “not expresseds It is sometimes called an abridsed or abvreviated syllogism. For examplet "411 men are mortal and Pedro is a man." The conclusion is supplied by the mind, as something under stoods A @ilemmacis a forn of argument which states alternative suppositions to the proposition and concludes in the speaker's favor in either sense. For exmple: If Jose killed Carlos in self-defense, he should be acquitted for acting according’ to the natural law. If Jose was the aggressor, he showld be acquitted for benefitting the state in killing a deadly criminal, But Jose acted in solf-defense or was the aggressors Therefore, in either case, he should be acquitted. The Sorites-is 4 series of dependent syllogism abridged by the _ omission throughout of one of the premises and of most of the intermediste™ -conelusions. For example: Al1 Filipinos are mens All men are vertebrat« AL vertebrates are animals; AQL animals are mov'nis Therefore, All Filipinos are mortal. An infersnce.in quavuitetive relations is a form of reasoning similar to the syllogism in wich the true major premise is not expressed ‘but implied or understood. For exazplet m Pedro is taller than Juans Jose is taller than Pedro; 3 Therefore, Jose is taller than Juan,