Debate basics · Beginner · About 5 min
Listen and take useful notes
Track how an argument changes
Negative · Before the roundRead the fictional case: AI and the future of work
Resolution Advanced AI will on net improve outcomes for workers
Fictional round packet: a two-year review of 30 employers records 300 retained workers receiving 4% higher inflation-adjusted pay and working 37 rather than 40 hours per week after AI adoption. Sixty entry-level roles were removed and 40 technical roles added. Of the 60 displaced workers, 18 entered the new roles, 24 found work elsewhere at 8% lower pay, and 18 were still unemployed six months later. The other 22 new roles went to different applicants. The review does not isolate AI from every other change or forecast the whole economy. The affirmative argues that productive tools can improve pay and time for many workers. The negative argues that concentrated losses and barriers to new work can outweigh those gains.
A flow is a set of notes that follows arguments through successive speeches. Start with the claim and support, then place the challenge and reply next to that same argument. You can see what remains unanswered.
Use short phrases you can act on. Preserve important qualifications, but do not try to transcribe the whole speech. The aim is to prepare your next question or response while keeping the exchange connected.
Follow one argument across the exchange
Note: “New roles → transition benefit.”
Place beside the claim: “Access limited: 18/60.”
Mark that this defends a separate benefit rather than fully repairing transitions.
Your next speech needs that comparison, not another repetition of 18/60.
Name the argument
Use a short label such as “worker time” or “transition access.”
Connect the turns
Keep each challenge beside the claim it answers.
Mark the next task
Note whether to defend, press, compare or move on.
One line of a simple flow
Resolution Advanced AI will on net improve outcomes for workers
Fictional round packet: a two-year review of 30 employers records 300 retained workers receiving 4% higher inflation-adjusted pay and working 37 rather than 40 hours per week after AI adoption. Sixty entry-level roles were removed and 40 technical roles added. Of the 60 displaced workers, 18 entered the new roles, 24 found work elsewhere at 8% lower pay, and 18 were still unemployed six months later. The other 22 new roles went to different applicants. The review does not isolate AI from every other change or forecast the whole economy. The affirmative argues that productive tools can improve pay and time for many workers. The negative argues that concentrated losses and barriers to new work can outweigh those gains.
- Affirmative claim
New technical roles help answer displacement.
Note: “New roles → transition benefit.”
- Negative challenge
Only 18 of 60 displaced workers reached those roles.
Place beside the claim: “Access limited: 18/60.”
- Affirmative reply
Transition is incomplete, but retained workers also gained time and pay.
Mark that this defends a separate benefit rather than fully repairing transitions.
- Next negative task
Compare the severity of displacement with the retained workers’ gains.
Your next speech needs that comparison, not another repetition of 18/60.
Useful notes show what the next speech still has to do.
Test the reasoning
Read the fictional practice case
Resolution Advanced AI will on net improve outcomes for workers
Fictional round packet: a two-year review of 30 employers records 300 retained workers receiving 4% higher inflation-adjusted pay and working 37 rather than 40 hours per week after AI adoption. Sixty entry-level roles were removed and 40 technical roles added. Of the 60 displaced workers, 18 entered the new roles, 24 found work elsewhere at 8% lower pay, and 18 were still unemployed six months later. The other 22 new roles went to different applicants. The review does not isolate AI from every other change or forecast the whole economy. The affirmative argues that productive tools can improve pay and time for many workers. The negative argues that concentrated losses and barriers to new work can outweigh those gains.
Your turn
Negative · Before the roundMake three flow notes: original reason, challenge and reply. Add the task your next speech needs to do.
Read the fictional case: The four-day workweek
Resolution A four-day, 32-hour standard work week should replace the current five-day, 40-hour model
Fictional exchange: affirmative says output held at unchanged weekly pay. Negative points to an 8% payroll increase in retail and distribution. Affirmative accepts it but argues that eight hours of time and lower absence justify the cost.
You can type or use your keyboard’s microphone to dictate. Your text stays editable. Practice is optional.
Loading your progress…
Help me get started
Reason: … Challenge: … Reply: … Next task: …
Try it aloud
Use the timer for a spoken attempt if it helps. Practice without recording, then note what you would improve.
Speaking is self-reviewed. No microphone or recording is required.
Review and continue
Resolution A four-day, 32-hour standard work week should replace the current five-day, 40-hour model
Read the practice task and fictional case
Make three flow notes: original reason, challenge and reply. Add the task your next speech needs to do.
Fictional exchange: affirmative says output held at unchanged weekly pay. Negative points to an 8% payroll increase in retail and distribution. Affirmative accepts it but argues that eight hours of time and lower absence justify the cost.
Your response
You can return to the practice whenever you want.
One model response
Reason: time gain at stable output and weekly pay. Challenge: retail/distribution payroll +8%. Reply: affirmative accepts the cost and prioritizes time plus lower absence. Next task: compare the value of those recurring gains with the size and distribution of the cost; do not spend the speech proving a cost they already accepted.
A short note locates the cost argument.
The remaining disagreement concerns weight, not whether the cost exists.
This gives your rebuttal an actual task.
The notes track the argument across turns and identify a strategic next task. They distinguish a concession of a fact from agreement about its significance.
Review the performance
- OrganizationI preserve the actual argument and important qualifications.
- RefutationI connect the challenge and reply to the same issue.
- ClarityMy notes identify the next useful action.
Choose one move to improve, revise your response, then try it aloud.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Writing a transcript that leaves no time to think.
- Treating a new independent reason as an answer to the old challenge.
Loading your progress…