We’ve all had that feeling. Finding out that you lost a round that you had in the bag! You had all the arguments and deep, multi-level refutations; their case just wouldn’t do anything! Oftentimes, a coach or fellow competitor gives feedback along the lines of, ‘Put more pathos into it. Be passionate!’ This advice is helpful but only goes so far. In this blog, I want to provide you with a practical technique you can use every single debate round to craft a well-rounded rhetorical triangle that will never leave you in the position I just described.
If you’ve been in debate for any length of time, you’ve heard the terms ethos, pathos, and logos—the rhetorical triangle. Every persuasive stance incorporates elements of these three. The importance of these elements is covered in other places. My purpose today is not to describe their value but to guarantee they are effectively used every round.
Overemphasis on one point
How? If you’re like me, you’ve found yourself lacking in at least one of these aspects of persuasion and have focused incredibly hard on incorporating it into your next rounds. Unfortunately, what often happens is an overemphasis on one point of the triangle, which degrades your ability to convey the other two. This thought may seem somewhat vague, so let’s look at an example: In my first year of debating, my partner and I ran a case that involved the US ending its support of UN peacekeepers because of human rights abuses, inefficiency, and, quite simply, the fact that peacekeepers are a boondoggle. I saw pathos as the strength of the case and devoted most of my time and energy to that rhetorical point. This led to us losing many ballots because we didn’t have enough credentials to back up our idea.
Balance is the trick.
One argument for each point
You may be thinking, ‘Well, I essentially do this whenever I respond to the various negative or affirmative arguments!’ And maybe so. But here is where the finesse of technique comes in. As I said, all arguments contain elements of ethos, pathos, and logos, which causes many people to make the mistake of assuming all their bases are covered. This mistake is what causes the situation I described at the beginning. Dedicating an entire argument to each part of the rhetorical triangle helps the judge remember all the individual points of the triangle, which taken together warrant their ballot. Not only that, but this technique ensures that the use of the rhetorical triangle in your speech never becomes only a line. (What is a triangle with only two points?) It’s easy to lean too far in one direction in response to the other team’s claims, but this technique allows you to retain control of the round and leave the judge with no reservations. Try it!
Teaser:
Want to know how to upgrade this technique by categorizing the other teams’ strengths and weaknesses? Learn more with my private coaching!
