The

L I N C O L N -D O U G L A S
DEBATES
 Unearth the Timeless Art of
Persuasion - A Comprehensive
Exploration of the Lincoln &
Douglas Debate Style
 What distinguishes
Lincoln-Douglas debate
from other formats?
 - The Lincoln-Douglas debate is the only debate that
focuses on values, ethics, and philosophy, as well as its
one-on-one format, making it distinct from other debate
formats.
 Debate Philosophical No. of Cross- Evidence and
Format Resolution
Format Focus Debaters Examination Research

Two Cross-
Typically i While evidence is
Emphasizes debaters, examination
Lincoln nvolves mo used, the focus is
ethical and the is present but
Douglas 1v1 rality, ethic often on
philosophical Affirmative less intense
(LD) s, considerations
philosophical
and the compared to
and values reasoning.
Negative. CX debate.

VS

Usually Involves
policy More focused extreme and
oriented, on the Four aggressive High emphasis on
Cross Examinatio focusing on practical debaters, questioning evidence-based
2x2
n (CX) specific implications two on to arguments.
courses of of proposed each side challenge
action. policies opponents'
positions.
 Depends on Can vary, but Emphasis on
Can refer to a Varies based May or may
the specific parliamentar quick thinking
variety of on the not include
style, but y debates and adaptability;
debate styles, specific rules cross
parliamentar often involve evidence may be
Rebuttal but often used and examination,
y debates two used, but it's not
to describe guidelines of depending on
may cover a teams with always as
parliamentary the debate the rules.
range of two debaters extensive as in CX.
style debates format.
topics. each.

Typically
Emphasizes includes a
Usually
Involves legal form of
involves two Heavy emphasis
Simulates legal issues reasoning, questioning,
teams with on legal research,
appellate and precedent, but it is more
Moot Court two or more precedent, and
court hypothetical and formal and
members on the application of
proceedings. cases. application structured
each team. legal principles.
of law. than in debate
formats
How does LD debate focus
on ethical or moral
considerations in its topics?
DEBATERS FREQUENTLY INVOKE MORAL
PHILOSOPHIES TO DEFEND HUMAN BEHAVIOR
OR OUTLINE APPROPRIATE HUMAN CONDUCT IN
SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. THESE PHILOSOPHICAL
PERSPECTIVES EXPLAIN HOW WE MIGHT
DETERMINE WHETHER A GIVEN COURSE OF
CONDUCT IS "MORAL" OR "THE RIGHT THING TO
DO." THESE PHILOSOPHIES TYPICALLY LOOK AT A
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION LIKE "DO THE ENDS
JUSTIFY THE MEANS?" AND OCCASIONALLY
CONSIDER INTENTIONS AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR
APPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR. MORAL PHILOSOPHY IS
THE AREA OF PHILOSOPHY THAT INCLUDES THE
STUDY OF ETHICS.
THE RESOLUTION OR TOPIC IN LD DEBATE
TYPICALLY PRESENTS A VALUE JUDGMENT OR A
CLASH BETWEEN COMPETING VALUES,
REQUIRING DEBATERS TO ARGUE FOR OR
AGAINST THE RESOLUTION BASED ON ETHICAL
PRINCIPLES. FOR INSTANCE, TOPICS MIGHT
REVOLVE AROUND JUSTICE, FREEDOM,
MORALITY, RIGHTS, OR DUTY.
DEBATERS ARE EXPECTED TO CONSTRUCT
ARGUMENTS BASED ON ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS,
SUCH AS UTILITARIANISM, DEONTOLOGY, VIRTUE
ETHICS, OR SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY. THEY
MUST ANALYZE HOW THE RESOLUTION ALIGNS
OR CONFLICTS WITH THESE ETHICAL THEORIES
AND ARTICULATE THEIR POSITIONS
PERSUASIVELY.
 Emphasizes maximizing overall happiness or well-being. Debaters using utilitarianism
might argue that the morally correct action is the one that produces the greatest good
Utilitarianism for the most significant number of people.

Deontology: Deontological ethics focuses on actions' inherent rightness or wrongness,

regardless of their consequences. Debaters might argue that specific actions are
intrinsically moral or immoral based on principles like Kant's categorical imperative.

This framework revolves around cultivating virtuous traits and character. Debaters might
Virtue Ethics focus on how actions align with or detract from virtuous behavior and character traits.

Based on the idea that moral principles are derived from a hypothetical agreement among
rational individuals, this framework considers what rules or principles people agree to in a
Social Contract Theory fair and impartial initial position.

This framework emphasizes respecting individual rights and freedoms. Debaters might
Rights-Based Ethics argue that actions should be judged based on whether they respect or violate fundamental
rights.

Feminist Ethics This framework emphasizes the importance of relationships, empathy, and care. Debaters using this
perspective might focus on care, relationships, and equality issues.
 Debaters often select an ethical framework that aligns
with their arguments and allows them to present a coherent
and persuasive case. They use these frameworks to analyze
the resolution, evaluate the ethical implications, and justify
their stance based on these moral principles. The clash in
LD debate often occurs when debaters apply different
ethical frameworks to the exact resolution, leading to
discussions on conflicting moral values and reasoning.
How do debaters construct
and present their cases in
Lincoln-Douglas debate?
 The Lincoln-Douglas debate, named after the historic
debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas,
is a unique debate emphasizing philosophy, ethics, and
values.

1v1

The strategies and techniques may

vary depending on the debater's style
and debate topic.
 Debaters begin by establishing the burdens of each debater and setting up their values and
criteria. The value represents the highest thing debaters seek to achieve when affirming or
Establishing the Framework negating. Typical values include justice, morality, and societal welfare. The criterion is the
standard by which the value is achieved or evaluated. It helps debaters weigh the impacts
of their arguments about the value.

Debaters conduct thorough research on the debate topic to gather evidence, statistics, and
expert opinions to support their arguments. They use reputable sources such as academic
Research and Evidence journals, books, and credible witnesses to ensure the accuracy and reliability of their
evidence. This research helps debaters build a strong foundation for their case.

Debaters organize their arguments into a logical structure. The case typically consists of
several contentions supported by evidence and analysis. Contentions are the main points
Constructing the Case that debaters use to support their position. Each contention should directly relate to the
value and criterion established in the framework.

Debaters present their arguments in a clear and organized manner. They use both "cards"
(quotes from experts) and "analytics" (their analysis) to support their points. Cards can
Presenting Arguments establish credibility and provide strong warrants, while analytics can provide context and
explanations. Debaters should explain the significance of their evidence and how it
supports their overall case.

Debaters analyze and explain the evidence and arguments they present. They connect the cards and
analytics to show how they support their position and address the value and criterion established in
the framework. Debaters should provide logical reasoning and explanations to convince the judge of
Providing Analysis the validity of their arguments.
 After presenting their case, debaters engage in rebuttal to address the arguments
presented by their opponent. They challenge the opponent's evidence, logic, and
Rebuttal reasoning to weaken their opponent's case and strengthen their position. Rebuttal
requires critical thinking skills and identifying flaws in the opponent's arguments.

Debaters have the opportunity to ask questions during cross-examination. They

can use this time to clarify their opponent's arguments, challenge their opponent's
Cross-Examination evidence, or gather information to support their case. Cross-examination allows
debaters to expose weaknesses in their opponent's case and strengthen their
arguments.

In the final speeches, debaters summarize their main arguments and reinforce
their position. They highlight the key points that support their case and explain
why their position is more vital than their opponent's. Summation requires
practical communication skills and the ability to leave a lasting impression on the
Summation judge.
It is important to note that this is a general overview of how debaters construct and
present their cases in the Lincoln-Douglas debate.
 How does LD debate
involve the comparison of
values and principles?
 A careful comparison and analysis of values
and ideas were conducted during the Lincoln-
Douglas
debates, especially in light of the contentious
topic of slavery. The following are some salient
features of
the arguments that draw attention to the
contradiction in ideals and principles:
 PRINCIPLE Values

Personal Society Government

The Declaration of Independence's natural rights life - the equality - all government
and human equality were highlighted by supreme members legitimacy -
Lincoln in particular. He maintained that slavery value have the recognized
was inherently incompatible with these ideals and perhaps and same authority
The Morality of Slavery often related opportunities granted to
that
they ought to be applied to all people, including to quality of egalitarianis the
African Americans. life m - see government
quality of life equality security - the
- qualities above (more duty of the
that make life a philosophy government
worth living of equality) to protect
liberty - social justice - citizens, lives,
freedom to the society liberty, and
Douglas believed that each state should have the do whatever, conforms to property
authority to determine whether or not to whenever standards of (open
permit slavery, and he cherished the idea of justice - just desserts markets -
popular sovereignty. Lincoln supported a more receiving just social sometimes) -
robust desserts harmony - freedom to
Popular Sovereignty vs. Federal Authority
federal involvement in stopping the expansion of happiness - everyone gets participate in
slavery into new areas, even though he the sense of along the
acknowledged pleasure societal marketplace
states' rights. autonomy - welfare/well- autonomy -
self- being - freedom
determinatio community from outside
n care interference
safety - free upward duty of
 but he did not emphasize equality as much when it
came to
slavery.

from all mobility - the

ability to climb
manner of
the ladder of
threats success
One of Lincoln's core beliefs was the notion that all health - fairness -
men are created equal. Using this theory without everyone is
to the debate over slavery, he claimed that it went physical treated justly
against the country's commitment to equality. limitation community/bel
Role of Government
Douglas was a supporter of democracy, but he did well-being - onging - being government -
not emphasize equality as much when it came to accepted by the
general sense values arising
slavery. group
that life is out of the
rule of law -
good willingness to social
self- submit to legal contract; duty
worth/dignity authority to protect
- one's life has democracy/de citizens
value to mocratic ideals morality - the
- everyone has
others correct
an equal voice
privacy - behavior of
progress /
One of Lincoln's concerns on the effects of slavery anonymity or social progress nations and
on the financial prospects of free workers the right to - the ability to governments.
was this. Douglas gave the popular sovereignty keep some achieve higher
Economic Perspectives
concept precedence above economic concerns, aspects of life ideals or
even non-public standards
morality - morality -
though he acknowledged them
group or
discernment
corporate
of proper proper
behavior behavior
 In conclusion, a thorough examination of ideals and
principles—particularly about
slavery—was included in the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
The debates shed light on the candidates'
divergent moral philosophies, attitudes toward equality
and democracy, opinions regarding the function
of the state, and assessments of the potential economic
effects. Ultimately, these contrasts highlighted
the deep ideological splits that marked American
history until the Civil War.
SAMPLE SCENARIO:
 L&D FLOW
Flowing entails outlining the main points of each speech in the debate.
However, unlike traditional note-taking where you write notes across an
entire sheet of paper, you should use a legal pad, printer paper, legal
paper, card stock (with flowing, it’s a bit of a “whatever floats your boat”
mentality) and separate it into 5 columns on the sheet of paper your
flowing the affirmative case, and 4 columns on the sheet of paper that
you are flowing the negative case. This means that you should always
have, at the very least, two sheets of paper prepared to flow on. In each
of these columns, you will flow the arguments vertically, leaving space in
between each unique argument that you need to answer.
Example:
“Resolved: Burger King is better than McDonalds”
 Source: National Forensic League

1st Negative Rebuttal 2nd Negative Rebuttal

Affirmative Case (also part of the Negative 1st Affirmative Rebuttal (also referred to as the
Construction) 1NR) 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal

McDonalds and Burger

Burger King’s meat is still
King get their meat from
Actually, McDonalds of higher quality than
the same source, which
meat is of better quality Burger King’s meat isn’t McDonald’s because
Burger King is better means that this argument
because it isn’t frozen for frozen any longer than Burger King takes more
than McDonalds because is neither a reason to
weeks before cooked McDonalds, and their steps to ensure that their
the Whopper is made vote affirmative or
(probably almost patties are made with a burgers are kept in
with better quality meat. negative since it doesn’t
certainly false, but higher quality meat. environments that keep
offer a unique
regardless). the meat as fresh as
justification to eat at
possible.
Burger King.

Actually, McDonalds This argument is false,

McDonalds value menu, value menu gives the negative did not
McDonalds offers
Burger King is better even if it does have a customers the choice of respond to my answer to
customers a wider
than McDonalds because wider variety of options, purchasing a double this study that it was
variety of options on
their value menu is a does not give customers cheeseburger with 25% based on how
their menu, making it a
more cost effective the same amount of food, more meat, according to McDonalds used to make
more attractive option
choice for customers. so their money is better a study presented in the their burgers not how
for customers.
spent at Burger King. first negative they currently make
construction. them.
 Why it is important to
debaters to articulate the
moral implications of their
arguments?
 Political debate is an important process in the United States and they
facilitate, influence, and shape public opinion. Basically in politics
articulating the moral implications of the arguments in political debates
helps the public decide which candidates to vote for. However, politicians
should not deal with the currency of moral issues. Moral issues are not
political issues. Politics is compromised moral issues cannot be
compromised.
In 1850, Stephen Douglas was the last of the greatly
compromised politicians whose careers were built on unity,
trying to find a bond of unity between North and South rather
than speaking for a particular section. He embraced and
associated the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty wherein people Douglas's mantra is “I denied the right of Congress to
of the territories decide for themselves whether they want force a good thing on a people who don’t want it.” The
slavery or not. government should not tell people how to live their lives.
The government should not judge the morality
of the people.

On the other hand, Abraham Lincoln mostly well-liked among

anti-slavery Northerners had made some of the most
powerfully worded speeches against slavery of any politician at
the time. Lincoln knew that slavery was a moral evil and he
regularly spoke out against it in powerful
speeches that helped him rise through the ranks of the new
Republic Party.
 Why is Lincoln-Douglas
debate considered more
individualistic compared
to other debate formats?
 The Lincoln-Douglas debate format, also known as LD debate, is a popular form of
competitive debate in the field of forensics. This research paper aims to explore why
the Lincoln-Douglas debate is considered more individualistic compared to other
debate formats. By analyzing the unique characteristics of LD debate such as its
emphasis on value-oriented arguments and the solo nature of the competition this
paper will demonstrate how these aspects contribute to the individualistic nature of
this debate format.
All formats of debate involve some preparation. However, the exact amount and type
of preparation varies widely across formats. If you set your mind to it, any of the
formats are options.
 There are different
individualistic nature of LD Focus on Personal Growth.

Debate: The Lincoln-Douglas debate format places a

significant emphasis on personal growth and
development. Debaters are encouraged to delve
Emphasis on Value-Oriented deeply into philosophical texts, engage in
Arguments.
In LD debate participants engage in a clash of Solo Competition extensive research and refine their public
speaking skills. This process of self-improvement
values rather than focusing solely on policy or Unlike other debate formats that involve team nurtures individuality and encourages debaters to
fact-based arguments. The debaters are collaboration, LD debate is an individual develop their own style and voice within the
required to construct persuasive arguments competition. Each participant is solely debate community (Williams 2019).
based on ethical, moral and philosophical responsible for crafting their arguments,
principles. This emphasis on individual values conducting research and delivering their case.
allows debaters to express their personal Thus, the Lincoln-Douglas debate is considered
This individualistic aspect of LD debate allows
beliefs and opinions making LD debate a more individualistic compared to other debate
debaters to showcase their personal skills,
platform for individual expression and self- formats due to its emphasis on value-oriented
critical thinking abilities and unique perspectives
advocacy (Smith 2018). arguments, the solo nature of the competition
(Johnson 2016). It fosters independence, self-
and its focus on personal growth. By providing a
reliance and autonomy distinguishing LD debate
platform for individual expression fostering
from other debate formats.
independence and encouraging personal
development LD debate allows participants to
cultivate their unique perspectives and skills. As a
result, LD debate stands out as a format that
celebrates individualism within the realm of
competitive debate.
 References
Johnson, M. (2016). The Art of Lincoln-Douglas Debate. The
Forensic Educator, 31(1), 9-14.

Smith, A. (2018). Values in Lincoln-Douglas Debate. The

Journal of Argumentation in Context, 7(2), 193-209.

Williams, R. (2019). The Role of Personal Development in

Lincoln-Douglas Debate. Journal of Forensics, 21(3), 45-58.