Study and Analysis of Arena Debates and Courtroom Debates Based on Debating Principles

DOI

10.2991/978-2-38476-432-7_3How to use a DOI?

Keywords

Arena debates; courtroom debates; principles of debate; modes of debate; Debate similarities and differences

Abstract

The research in this paper analyses and compares the similarities and differences between arena debates and courtroom debates based on the basic research principles of debate, and at the same time provides in-depth analyses and research on two different occasions of debate based on the nature of debate in different settings. It makes a certain contribution to the practice of the two kinds of debates.

The meaning of the principle of debate is generally expressed as the principle that the parties have the right, under the auspices of the people's court, to put forward their own claims and evidence in the course of the litigation on the facts of the case, the issues in dispute and the applicable law, and to engage in mutual rebuttal and argumentation, in order to ascertain the facts, distinguish between right and wrong, and safeguard their own lawful rights and interests. Debate principle is the party's right to debate the important status of the centralised embodiment of the exercise of the right to debate throughout the process of litigation, including the court debate stage of the parties to the oral debate, including through the indictment, defence briefs, etc., written debate, the content of not only involves litigation entity disputes, such as the authenticity of the evidence, the legality of the determination of the facts and the application of the law, but also includes the procedural aspects of the litigation, such as Jurisdiction, etc. In short, the principle of argumentation guarantees the procedural right of the parties to make factual and evidentiary claims and to argue their substantive rights. This study examines arena debates and courtroom debates through the lens of universal debating principles, highlighting their shared foundations in clarity, evidence, persuasion, and ethical conduct.

Copyright

© 2025 The Author(s)

Open Access

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Xiangyu Ma
PY  - 2025
DA  - 2025/06/22
TI  - Study and Analysis of Arena Debates and Courtroom Debates Based on Debating Principles
BT  - Proceedings of the 2025 4th International Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities and Arts (SSHA 2025)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 15
EP  - 21
SN  - 2352-5398
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-432-7_3
DO  - 10.2991/978-2-38476-432-7_3
ID  - Ma2025
ER  -