Opposing Viewpoints and Global Issues
Key Features:
Search for a Topic using the Search Box, or Click Here to Browse for an Issue.
The "Hulu" to Opposing Viewpoints' "Netflix", EBSCO Points of View Reference Center also provides Overviews and Point/Counterpoint essays (from the Points of View series) in addition to curated articles from magazines, newspapers, journals, and more.
Another option you should be familiar with from your 9th-grade Service paper. SIRS operates similarly to Opposing Viewpoints and Points of View Reference Center.
It's okay to use a "Biased" source (i.e. a source that has an opinion / position / side on your topic) as long as you are aware that the source is biased , recognize how that bias will affect the quality of the information presented, and are prepared to defend it. However, "biased" sources can be easier for your opponents to attack, though just being "biased" doesn't automatically make something wrong.
This is the short version. For more detail see the Debate Tips Page.
Don't Use It: it's not a good site for research. This is a classic case of "Just because the website's name sounds like it's exactly what you want, it doesn't mean it is." You might, potentially, get ideas for arguments on it, but since it's a site where anyone can post, credentials/authority are difficult to identify, and it's about controversial topics (and it's on the Internet), you are not likely to get much value from it, and you are likely to wind up with uninformed opinions as you are proper arguments.
Researching Controversial Issues Online can be Very Risky. The more controversial an issue is, the the greater the range of opinions (and quality of argument) will be about that issue. While biased positions aren't bad in a debate (see note on Bias), unsupported, inaccurate, or incorrectly supported arguments are not okay in a debate. Credibility and Authority of sources is very important to a debate, and determining credibility and authority of free web sources is difficult (and our own cognitive biases make us think we're better at doing it than we actually are). This is not to say you should not use the web for research, but it is to say that it requires a lot more work (possibly more than you will, or are willing to, do) to determine source quality.
Remember: sources on the web are more likely to be weak sources, and "My Opponents' Sources are Weak, Here's Why..." is a perfectly legitimate debate refutation strategy.
Here are a few good ones for debate. They aren't topic-specific, but many have general tips and common topics.
One bonus of Library databases is that they offer preformatted citations in MLA 8th edition format (and other formats).
These Pre-formatted citations are meant to be used as a guide, as they are rarely perfect, and are not meant to replace the need to understand how to read and create citations.
Here is an example of a preformatted "MLA 8th Edition" citation for an article from SIRS Issues Researcher:
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does Aid Help? Or does it Harm?" The Spectator (London), 17 Feb 2018. sirsissuesresearcher, https://explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2266007475?accountid=69624.
Here's a Citation for the same article from GALE Opposing Viewpoints:
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does aid help? The evidence suggests it may do more harm than good." Spectator, vol. 336, no. 9886, 17 Feb. 2018, p. 12+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A538713184/OVIC?u=centcath&sid=OVIC&xid=a591ab45. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
Both citations are "Pretty Good" citations, but neither one is totally correct
Let's take a look. RED will mean things that are wrong, YELLOW will be things that we may consider changing, and GREEN are things that one database's citation has that the other one is missing.
The SIRS citation:
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does Aid Help? Or does it Harm?" The Spectator (London), 17 Feb 2018. sirsissuesresearcher, https://explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2266007475?accountid=69624.
Note that this resource on SIRS changes the title of the Article, because the database is treating it as a reprint.
The GALE citation:
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does aid help? The evidence suggests it may do more harm than good." Spectator, vol. 336, no. 9886, 17 Feb. 2018, p. 12+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A538713184/OVIC?u=centcath&sid=OVIC&xid=a591ab45. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
Here's Improved Versions of the Citation.
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does Aid Help? Or Does It Harm?" The Spectator (London), 17 Feb. 2018. SIRS Issues Researcher, explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2266007475?accountid=69624. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
Sergeant, Harriet. "Does Aid help? The Evidence Suggests It May Do More Harm than Good." Spectator, vol. 336, no. 9886, 17 Feb. 2018, p. 12+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A538713184/OVIC?u=centcath&sid=OVIC&xid=a591ab45. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
Step 1: Build a Castle that you will defend (Establish your position on the topic and arguments (towers) that support it with evidence). Your opponents do the same. |
|
Step 2: Attack the Opponent's Castle (Make Refutation arguments against their position / argument) |
|
.... Oh No! Your Castle's Towers have been Attacked, too!... | |
Step 3: Rebuild your Towers & Castle (Make Rebuttal arguments to the Refutations made against your Arguments) |
|
> |
Step 4: Whichever Castle is standing the Strongest Wins! It's not enough for your opponent's castle to be the most-on-fire, if yours is still burning too.
|
This is the short version. For more detail see the Debate Tips Page.
Once you have done some research (though RE-Search is an ongoing process), it's time to start preparing for the debate. This is the short version. For more detail see the Debate Tips Page.
This is the short version. For more detail see the Debate Tips Page.
(6. Debate is not the only way to discuss a controversial/mullti-sided issue)