A discussion may arise if the views of two or more persons differ. For example, if one person thinks municipal redivision is a good solution to too much official bureaucracy and the other does not. In a discussion, the different parties indicate why they support a certain position, i.e. they present arguments to substantiate their point of view. This way, you look for the best position together.

[well] There are five important rules for a good discussion (Eemeren, Grootendorst, & Snoeck Henkemans, 2001):

1. Each participant is free to express their views or doubts.
2. An argument or position must be formulated clearly.
3. Anyone who expresses a position must defend that position when asked to do so.
4. You must withdraw a position if you have insufficient arguments to support it.
5. If someone else defends their position well, you must abandon your doubt.[/well]

How convincing you are depends to a large extent on the quality of your arguments. You should mention concrete examples, figures or research results. The way you defend your position also matters. For instance, it is a good idea to have a few arguments up your sleeve rather than mention everything in one go and run out of steam. Phrases like ‘research has shown that…’ rather than ‘I happen to know that…’ or ‘I think that…’ have a much bigger impact.

A good proposition

A debate is a specific form of discussion and it has a number of rules (for example, about the amount of speaking time per person). A good proposition is essential for a successful debate, so you should really take the time to think about it properly. Throughout this degree programme you will have to formulate many propositions, for example, for a discussion as an interactive element of a presentation.

[collapse title= “Pay attention to the following:”]

Proponents and opponents must have equal opportunities during the debate. Then, both sides are able to think of arguments to support their position.

• Equal opportunities for both sides: Minister Vogelaar’s policy in problem neighbourhoods has been successful.
• Bias towards the opponents: The government should no longer concern itself with residents of disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

In an ideal scenario, a proposition should concern a subject that the participants and audience feel strongly about. It does not have to represent your personal opinion. Try to be a bit provocative!

• Provocative: The government should be able to designate locations for wind farms without consulting local residents.
• Unprovocative: We must minimise the risks of rising sea levels.

A statement should be concise and clearly formulated and should not contain double negatives. You do not have to define each term in advance. Sometimes a disputable term leads to a very interesting discussion. In the example of the problem neighbourhoods, you can expect a discussion about who has benefited from the policy: the original residents, the municipality, the housing corporation? And that would be a really interesting debate.

• Clear: More camera surveillance in public space is a desirable tool against violence at night.
• Vague: We should welcome camera surveillance. [/collapse]