An Introduction to Rebuttal

Hi, everyone. It's Jules from Consensus with another Brief Explainer video. Our Brief Explainers take an element of debating and public speaking and explain it quickly and clearly for you guys and your students. And if you'd like something even shorter, please try our Brief Explainer podcasts. And remember, we're here if you'd like to email us at debating or public speaking question.

Today's topic is another fundamentally important part of debating—an introduction to rebuttal. Put simply, rebuttal is using logic to cast doubt on the arguments made by the other team in the debate. This is an aspect of debating that shows exactly how well a team is listening to their opposition. Listening carefully enables you to properly connect with the other team's arguments and respond to them early and often.

To cover this topic, we'll be looking at a number of points. The importance of tracking your opposition speakers carefully, of being reasonable in your responses, of using dot points to help you with your thinking on your feet of identity, of identifying the other team's specific arguments and prioritising them for a battle of always responding to the best version of their ideas and of using structures for effective rebuttal organisation.

So to the key points. The big challenge with the rebuttal is that you can't be fully prepared for what will come out of the mouths of the other team. That's why listening carefully is so essential. You need to respond to all the important points that the other team has made. Leaving good ideas without a response makes it hard for your team to make up ground in the debate.

For this reason, learning a way to effectively track in writing everything that has been said is very important. One way is for your forth speaker to record every opposition argument in a simple, readable dot point list that is then shared with your next speaker. Meanwhile, that speaker can work on their own responses. Then check the list to make sure they haven't missed anything important before they get up to speak.

While some of your opposition's ideas may be weak, others are likely to be good. So be reasonable in your response. Always. If it is a good idea and one you would have used if you were on the other side of the case, look for where you can cast doubt on aspects of what they've said rather than just dismissing the whole thing. Have they exaggerated a benefit or not proved that their outcome is likely? These are some of the ways to cast doubt on a strong argument.

Because rebuttal always requires quick responses. It's good to get used to adding things as you're actually speaking. In other words, trying to think on your feet. It can feel a bit scary at first, but if you keep trying, it will become easier in time.

This skill also works well with another really important technique—using dot point headings to guide what you say instead of writing everything out in full. This is particularly useful for rebuttal because you have so little time to get on top of everything the other team says. If you can identify both the argument and the idea you'll use to rebut it in a few key words and then talk to that once you're on your feet, that will set you up to become a great rebuttal. Of course, if you have time, you could write some more keywords to jog your memory, identify an example or a phrase that you want to use to pin down the idea that you've got. If you have time for those additional prompts, that's great. But having the key idea there at least gives you the basis for creating the rest of your rebuttal on the spot.

When preparing to respond to the other team, it's necessary to identify their specific arguments and evaluate which ones are important and need to be dealt with first. Having them in order of priority is key to dealing with them effectively. You don't want any big ideas left unrebutted when your time runs out. While minor ones don't matter as much, it can often be picked up by a later speaker if they become more important sometime during the debate.

When identifying the argument that you're about to rebut, try to describe it as clearly and briefly as possible. It's not your job to repeat the opposition's whole point for them—they can do that. As you get more experienced, you'll need all your time for your own material. So short, sharp, accurate descriptions of their arguments are what you need.

Also, in the interests of effective use of time, don't repeatedly rebut the same arguments either in your own speech or across your whole team. Dealing with an argument once with detailed explanation is far better than bits of pieces that are disorganized or waste time because they've already been done. The big obvious exception to this is where the other team has actually responded to your rebuttal in ways that need to be replied to. They’re good so you need to actually deal with them. In other words, when they've developed their argument after hearing your rebuttal. Then engaging is essential.

Perhaps the most important task you have is to rebut the very best version of the other team's idea. This may seem weird. The counterintuitive, but it actually is what you always need to do. Firstly, exaggerating their argument makes you look unreasonable. And secondly, it's even more effective if you can deal with a strong argument misrepresenting the other team's ideas in the mistaken belief that this will make your rebuttal stronger. Is called straw-manning and that should always be avoided. Just think of it from your side. How does it make you feel, having someone tell you that you said something that you didn't say?

Finally, it's important to have an effective structure you can rely on to prompt your memory as you move through your rebuttal. This makes sure you explain and prove it. There are many ways of starting to do this. For instance, “They said, we say”, or “The opposition has used the argument (whatever), and we have two responses”.

We recommend using the APES structure because it helps you step through all the necessary stages of disproving your argument. In APES, “A” stands for the opposition's argument you’re identifying and about to rebut. “P” stands for the proof you are offering for why their argument isn't as reasonable as it should be. And “E” stands for, even if it could be reasonable, there's at least one reason the benefit they claim is exaggerated or unworkable. And “S” is a summary of why it's not a good idea, especially when compared with your solution. If you'd like to hear this, explained more, you can listen to our APES podcast, which is available on our website.

There are other rebuttal structures that are often used by experienced debaters. One of these you may have heard of is called thematic rebuttal, where rebuttal is organized under questions or themes. This structure can help organise a speech, so it saves time and provides direct comparison between the cases in a debate. But many speakers confuse themselves trying to use such a complex method. As long as you see the priority of what needs to be done in your speech, it's just it's then just a matter of what works for you. The value of clarity over fanciness is always worth remembering.

Now, for three common mistakes regarding rebuttal. Firstly, I want to reinforce that perhaps the most common mistake in rebuttal is straw-manning through exaggerating what the opposition has said to make it look bad. Being reasonable is always a better approach.

It's also common for a bottle to be repeated by consecutive speakers without any development of it. You should trust that the adjudicator has heard your first rebuttal and only return to the idea if there's a response from the opposition that needs to be dealt with.

Another common problem happens where arguments are identified for rebuttal, but answered only in one sentence without any real explanation. It's far better to have fewer well-explained key rebuttals rather than a long list of ones that are barely touched on.

So, to wrap things up, let's just go over a few things. Rebuttals should use logical explanation to cast doubt on the arguments made by the other team. Listening really carefully is key to good rebuttal. Rebuttal makes it necessary to keep trying to think on your feet as much as you can. Organise your rebuttal in order of importance of the ideas involved, and always try to answer the best version of the opposition's ideas.

Finally, for third speakers, rebuttal is almost everything. In that context, you might like to listen to our podcast on summaries and conclusions. It's on our website in the Resources archive.

That's it for today, everyone. Email us if you'd like a question answered. info@consensuseducation.org.au. Happy debating and keep safe. Bye, everyone.