Debate Flow for using Chat gpt - 2024.10.17. > 방명록&자유게시판

본문 바로가기
사이트 내 전체검색

방명록&자유게시판Home>커뮤니티>방명록&자유게시판


자료 Debate Flow for using Chat gpt - 2024.10.17.

페이지 정보

profile_image
작성자 ace나그네
댓글 0건 조회 73회 작성일 24-10-17 00:20

본문


0. You need to do debate. The debate topic is 'X.' If you understand, please give me definitions of the key terms of the debate topic, background contexts of the debate, and the problems and necessity for doing this debate, standards or policies for clarifying key issues for both sides of the debate.


1. (Proposition side) Please provide me your arguments, reasonings, evidences for supporting the topic. Plus, you need to provide logical links and explanations between arguments, reasoning, evidences, and the debate topic. Please do your best.


2. (Opposition Side) Please provide me your arguments, reasonings, evidences for opposing the topic. Plus, you need to provide logical links and explanations between arguments, reasoning, evidences, and the debate topic. Please do your best.


3. (Proposition Side) Please provide me rebuttals against the side of opposing topic. When you do rebuttals, please also provide the reasonings, evidences, and logical links to motions of the rebuttals. And the rebuttals need to point out directly what the opposing side above mentioned.


4. (Opposition Side) Please provide me rebuttals against the side of supporting topic. When you do rebuttals, please also provide the reasonings, evidences, and logical links to motions of the rebuttals. And the rebuttals need to point out directly what the supporting side above mentioned.


5. (Proposition Side) Please provide me counter-rebuttals against the rebuttals from the side of opposing topic. And please provide me the reconstructing and further strengthening initial arguments from the side of supporting topic. 


6. (Opposition Side) Please provide me counter-rebuttals against the rebuttals from the side of supporting topic. And please provide me the reconstructing and further strengthening initial arguments from the side of opposing topic. 


7. (Proposition Side) Please provide me extensions for supporting the topic. Extensions can include new arguments which have not yet been made in the debate, new rebuttals to material raised by the other side, new examples or case studies, new analysis or explanation of existing arguments, new applications of existing argumentation, new criteria for judging the debate or a new defense of existing criteria for weighing arguments.


In this time, please provide only 'x'. You should not provide other kinds of extensions. And please also provide reasonable and ample explanations about why the x is most important and relevant in this debate. 


8. (Opposition Side) Please provide me extensions for supporting the topic. Extensions can include new arguments which have not yet been made in the debate, new rebuttals to material raised by the other side, new examples or case studies, new analysis or explanation of existing arguments, new applications of existing argumentation, new criteria for judging the debate or a new defense of existing criteria for weighing arguments.


In this time, please provide only 'x'. You should not provide other kinds of extensions. And please also provide reasonable and ample explanations about why the x is most important and relevant in this debate. 


9. (Proposition Side) Please make the clashes and summaries from the arguments and rebuttals from both sides. Then please compare to explain why the supporting side should win this debate. 


10. (Opposition Side) Please make the clashes and summaries from the arguments and rebuttals from both sides. Then please compare to explain why the opposing side should win this debate. 


11. (Adjudicator for Proposition side) Now, the debate is finished. You are not debaters in above debate anymore. You need to adjudicate above debate from now on. If you give win to supporting side, please explain why you need to do that. When you explain the reason, please use below guidelines.


https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T14760725


Guidelines for Debate Adjudication:

An Example of a Win/Loss Decision Model for Pro-Con Debate


1. Win&Loss/Results/Rankings

1)Questions

(1)Who wins?

(2)Who loses?

2)Answers

(1)Team A wins.

(2)Team B loses.


2. Materials from debaters

1)Questions: What arguments, rebuttals, reasoning, evidence and other elements support the results?

2)Answers

(1)Team A wins because of the argument from the team.

(2)Team B loses because of the rebuttal from the team.


3. Main Clashes/Issues

1)Questions

(1)Why and how do materials from debaters stated by the adjudicator support the results?

(2)Why does the “data” suggested by the adjudicator establish main clashes/issues?

2)Answers

(1)Clash/Issue C is the main clash/issue of the debate, and team A wins because it takes the clash/issue by providing the good argument.

(2)Clash/Issue C is the main clash/issue of the debate, and team B loses because it doesn't take the clash/issue by providing the rebuttal supported by insufficient evidence.


4. Debate Rules, Conventions, Agreements

1)Questions: Which debate rules, conventions, and agreements support the main clashes/issues suggested by the adjudicator?

2)Answers: The adjudicator compares the argument from Team A and the rebuttal from Team B, because the debate rules ask adjudicators to compare arguments and rebuttals from each team to decide the win and loss.


5. Prepared Answers by the Adjudicator for Expected Complaints from Debaters

1)Questions: What variables related to win/loss are in each main clash/issue?

(1)What did the winning team do better in relation to the clash/issue?

(2)What did the losing team do less well in relation to the clash/issue?

2)Answers

(1)If the argument from Team A was not supported by the evidence, Team A could have lost the debate.

Real comment from the adjudicator in the debate: The argument from Team A was well supported by the evidence, so Team A wins the debate.

(2)If the rebuttal from Team B crushed the argument, Team B could have won the debate.

Real comment from the adjudicator in the debate: The rebuttal from Team B did not crush the argument, so Team B lost the debate.


6. Level of Confidence of the Adjudicator in the Debate Results

1)Questions: How much confidence does the adjudicator have about the win/loss of the debate?

2)Answers: This debate is close and hard to judge/clear and easy to judge.


12. (Adjudicator for Opposition side) Now, the debate is finished. You are not debaters in above debate anymore. You need to adjudicate above debate from now on. If you give win to supporting side, please explain why you need to do that. When you explain the reason, please use below guidelines.


https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T14760725


Guidelines for Debate Adjudication:

An Example of a Win/Loss Decision Model for Pro-Con Debate


1. Win&Loss/Results/Rankings

1)Questions

(1)Who wins?

(2)Who loses?

2)Answers

(1)Team A wins.

(2)Team B loses.


2. Materials from debaters

1)Questions: What arguments, rebuttals, reasoning, evidence and other elements support the results?

2)Answers

(1)Team A wins because of the argument from the team.

(2)Team B loses because of the rebuttal from the team.


3. Main Clashes/Issues

1)Questions

(1)Why and how do materials from debaters stated by the adjudicator support the results?

(2)Why does the “data” suggested by the adjudicator establish main clashes/issues?

2)Answers

(1)Clash/Issue C is the main clash/issue of the debate, and team A wins because it takes the clash/issue by providing the good argument.

(2)Clash/Issue C is the main clash/issue of the debate, and team B loses because it doesn't take the clash/issue by providing the rebuttal supported by insufficient evidence.


4. Debate Rules, Conventions, Agreements

1)Questions: Which debate rules, conventions, and agreements support the main clashes/issues suggested by the adjudicator?

2)Answers: The adjudicator compares the argument from Team A and the rebuttal from Team B, because the debate rules ask adjudicators to compare arguments and rebuttals from each team to decide the win and loss.


5. Prepared Answers by the Adjudicator for Expected Complaints from Debaters

1)Questions: What variables related to win/loss are in each main clash/issue?

(1)What did the winning team do better in relation to the clash/issue?

(2)What did the losing team do less well in relation to the clash/issue?

2)Answers

(1)If the argument from Team A was not supported by the evidence, Team A could have lost the debate.

Real comment from the adjudicator in the debate: The argument from Team A was well supported by the evidence, so Team A wins the debate.

(2)If the rebuttal from Team B crushed the argument, Team B could have won the debate.

Real comment from the adjudicator in the debate: The rebuttal from Team B did not crush the argument, so Team B lost the debate.


6. Level of Confidence of the Adjudicator in the Debate Results

1)Questions: How much confidence does the adjudicator have about the win/loss of the debate?

2)Answers: This debate is close and hard to judge/clear and easy to judge.


13. (Adjudicator for Proposition Side) What are the possible questions and complaints from the opposing side and how you will defend your initial decision against the questions and complaints?


14. (Adjudicator for Opposition Side) What are the possible questions and complaints from the supporting side and how you will defend your initial decision against the questions and complaints?


15. (Adjudicators) Please free from the decisions above, as adjudicators, please provide additional feedbacks to both sides for improving their whole arguments, rebuttals, clashes, summaries and others in this debate. 


16. (Proposition Side) Now, the adjudication from all adjudicators are finished. As the debaters from the supporting side, please evaluate both adjudicators who gave you opposite results. 


17. (Opposition Side) Now, as the debaters from the opposing side, please evaluate both adjudicators who gave you opposite results. 

댓글목록

등록된 댓글이 없습니다.

방명록&자유게시판Home>커뮤니티>방명록&자유게시판
Total 91건 1 페이지
게시물 검색

회원로그인

회원가입


운영자 SNS커뮤니티


https://www.facebook.com/groups/1987117991524411 https://www.facebook.com/acetraveler12 https://www.facebook.com/FlindersUniversityDebatingSociety https://twitter.com/acetraveler1

https://story.kakao.com/_d36z15 https://band.us/band/72550711 http://cafe.daum.net/acetraveler http://blog.daum.net/acetraveler

https://pf.kakao.com/_xocRxjK https://story.kakao.com/ch/toronsil2001 https://toronsil.tistory.com https://m.post.naver.com/acetraveler

https://blog.naver.com/acetraveler https://cafe.naver.com/toronsilsince2001 https://timeline.line.me/user/_dZVn8dOub0-9zubHJ-7LNDBubziVSzUT0jK3hn0 https://open.kakao.com/o/ghmiAdpc

https://www.instagram.com/acetraveler12 https://www.instagram.com/acetraveler12/channel/ https://www.tumblr.com/blog/toronsil https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChSQEwnxoTgesALkVkL_PKA

https://ameblo.jp/firest12/ http://acetraveler.blogspot.com/ https://www.reddit.com/user/acetraveler12 https://ok.ru/profile/585384389039

https://www.pinterest.co.kr/firest12/%ED%86%A0%EB%A1%A0%EC%8B%A4-%EC%82%AC%EC%9D%B4%ED%8A%B8/ https://vk.com/id614494296 https://vk.com/public198641212

https://tv.kakao.com/channel/3743718 https://www.linkedin.com/in/min-seob-lee-9a1b1729


사이트 정보

대한민국 토론커뮤니티-토론실 대표: 이민섭
☎ TEL 010-7670-7720 대한민국 서울특별시 동대문구 회기로 12길 37-5, 401호
Copyright © 2001 ~2024 토론실(toronsil.com) All Rights Reserved.
Mail : acetraveler@naver.com

여럿 빠뜨리고 벼락치기로 몰아서 몇 개 올리는 챗 GP…
대한민국 법원 주요 판결 2024년 6월 12일 아침 …
대한민국 법원 주요 판결 2024년 6월 10일 정리 …
미국 연방 대법원 주요 결정 2024년 6월 9일 정리…
프랑스 헌법재판소 (Le Conseil constitu…
독일 연방헌법재판소 주요 결정 2024년 6월 9일 정…
대한민국 법원 주요 판결 2024년 6월 9일 정리 결…
대한민국 법원 주요 판결 2024년 6월 6일 정리 결…
2024년 6월 1일 대한민국 헌법재판소 주요 결정 정…
2024년 5월 30일 대한민국 법원 주요 판결 정리 …
2024년 5월 27일 대한민국 법원 주요 판결 정리 …
2024년 5월 26일 대한민국 헌법재판소 주요 결정 …
2024년 5월 23일 대한민국 법원 주요 판결 정리 …
(펌글)법무부, ′24년 1차 불법체류 외국인 정부합동…
(펌글)장애인 편의시설 설치율 89.2%로 ‘18년보다…
조규홍 본부장 주재 중앙사고수습본부 제31차 회의 개최…
(펌글)장애인고용공단-아이티센그룹 ‘자회사형 장애인표준…
(펌글)신직업 및 유망산업 분야 현직자의 생생한 취업 …
(펌글)인공지능(AI) 시대의 청년취업, 「고용24」와…
(펌글)(참고) 고용률ㆍ경제활동참가율 3월 기준 역대 …
(펌글)(설명) 환경부는 기후적응법 제정을 추진한 바 …
(펌글)국립공원 암벽장 55곳 합동 안전점검
(펌글)(동정) 제2의 볼티모어 교량 충돌사고 대비한다
(펌글)통일부 북한정보포털 대문 화면
(펌글)2024.4.12. 대한민국 법원 대국민서비스 …
(펌글)발코니 벽 해체에 아랫집 소송···대법원 "위험…
(펌글)전세금 돌려준다 속이고 점유권 이전한 집주인, …
[펌글]국적 잃을뻔한 다문화 남매...대법 "주민등록증…
[펌글]2024. 4. 10. 각급법원(제1,2심) 판…
2022년 12월 9일(금) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
2022년 12월 2일(금) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
2022년 11월 28일(월) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
2022년 11월 22일(화) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
2022년 11월 17일(목) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
2022년 11월 12일(토) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
2022년 11월 7일(월) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
2022년 11월 4일(금) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
2022년 10월 17일(월) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
2022년 10월 10일(월) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 …
(토론실 사이트 펌글)IDS X KIDA Korea 2…
2022년 9월 24일(토), 25일(일) 일기(다이어…
(토론실 사이트 펌글)IDS X KIDA Korea 2…
2022년 9월 21일(수), 22일(목), 23일(금…
2022년 9월 20일(화) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
2022년 9월 19일(월) 일기(다이어트, 청취력 회…
(토론실 사이트 펌글)IDS X KIDA Korea 2…
2022년 9월 17일(토), 18일(일) 일기
2022년 9월 18일(일) 일기(체중변화 기록, 20…
(토론실 사이트 펌글)IDS X KIDA Korea 2…
2022년 9월 15일(목), 16일(금) 일기
Copyright © toronsil.com. All rights reserved.