Critical Thinking and How It Relates to Debating
We often wonder what skills are being used when interacting with others, whether it be casual conversation or in a formal setting. If we break down how the human brain functions when processing and rebutting information, we can come to the conclusion that six main skills are being used: interpretation, inference, evaluation, analysis, and explanation. Critical thinking is highly related to debating. It is extremely important to be able to break down and analyze what skills are at play during traditional debate. Critical thinking is highly practical and applicable to real life situations, including human interactions. It is especially useful in a debate setting. In the movie “Resolved”, Sam and Matt demonstrate a use of all the critical thinking skills. They efficiently demonstrate the use of core critical thinking skills such as analysis, explanation, inference, interpretation, evaluation and self-regulation when engaging with others. The mastery of all these skills contributed to their large success in their traditional debates. It is the reason why Matt and Sam have succeeded greatly in their traditional debates, knocking out all their competition with their exemplary use of their skills.

Evaluation is a crucial cognitive skill that tests your listening aptitude in a debate setting. The ability to evaluate your opponent’s arguments during a debate is the key to the successful formation of counterarguments. All strong debaters recognize that the ability to assess the credibility of the opposition’s statements is crucial in traditional debating. With buckets of information at their disposal, it is possible for debaters to match fact for fact during debates, to pick out factual flaws in their opponents’ assertions. The ability to do this in a debate may lead to a substantial decrease in your opponents’ general reputation and credibility, and give yourself the higher ground. In traditional debating, not only is it necessary to pick out factual fallacies in your opponent’s debates, but logical fallacies as well. Often times, people may contradict themselves, or give weak alternative interpretations of facts, statements, and quotes. These are two flaws that debaters need to be able to seek out and capitalize on in a live debate setting. It is also necessary to evaluate if your opponents’ evidence connects with their conclusion. The facts and arguments they present must logically tie to their conclusions. It is extremely important to be able to evaluate your opponent can tie to two together with reason and logic. Evaluation is extremely important in traditional debating, as Sam and Matt demonstrated in the movie. They were able to utilize their quick thinking skills to pick apart their opponents’ arguments, and assert their own credibility in the field. Evaluation is not only useful in traditional debating, but also in everyday interactions, everything ranging from conversations with friends to political meetings. It is an essential part of being a strong and well-rounded debater.

Explanation is the bread and butter of every strong public speaker, and it certainly applies in traditional debating. Every seasoned debater knows the importance of being able to clearly articulate your ideas and express your opinion. You may have many ideas and thoughts strongly support your argument, but if you don’t have the ability to explain how these ideas work and interrelate, your ideas may never be exploited to their full potential. In traditional debating, you must be able to explain your reasoning and your findings to a high degree. When you make certain claims, you must explain your thought process and how you reached your findings. The thought process is just as important, if not more important than the final product. If you interpret a fact or quote differently, you must be able to explain why and how you are doing so, in a coherent and sequential fashion. Sometimes, however,