"Okay, please calm down. Are the debaters on both sides ready? If there is no problem, prepare to start the competition."

While the audience was whispering, a host walked up to the podium in the middle of the classroom, knocked on the table, and signaled everyone to be quiet.

The host is a member of the school’s debate team, a junior senior from the Academy of Local Sciences, named Su Qin. I heard that he represented the school in the qualifiers of the East China Division of the “International College Debate” last year.

Although he was defeated by several famous universities such as Fudan and Jinling, and was not shortlisted. However, Su Qin's spraying skills were already able to walk sideways on this acre of three-point land of Jinling Normal University.

Both sides said they were ready.

Su Qin took a last look and officially announced: "Today's game debate topic is, 'Is food and clothing a necessary condition for talking about morality', the official method college team, the argument is 'a necessary condition', and the opposite side's Digital Science College team, the argument is 'a not a necessary condition'.

This topic is an old topic from the competition seven or eight years ago. Many predecessors have explained it. At present, it is quite fair to both sides.

But I also hope that the students participating in the competition today will not be bound by the routines of their predecessors, and can create new sparks of thought. This is the value more important than victory or defeat. Now I announce that the competition has officially begun, so please ask the first debater of the party to make an opening statement first."

The scene completely quieted down, and everyone looked at Chen Sicong, a debater at the law school team.

Chen Sicong had been there two games before, but he had never served as a debater, so he was a little nervous and kept complaining about Feng Jianxiong's arrangements in his heart. At this moment, he stood up and spoke with a restrained attitude: "Dear host and jury, opposing debaters, and everyone, everyone..."

When Chen Sicong said the three words "Hello everyone", he was very stern: the first word should be slightly soft, the second word should be significantly higher, and the third word should be flat, which is a victim of the routine textbook "Teaching You to Learn Speech".

Although the tone is stereotyped, it is not helpful for expressing the problem.

"As we all know, the economic foundation determines the superstructure. Not only is the great mentor Ma Kesi understand this principle, but the ancient sages and wise men of our country have also understood it since ancient times. Confucius said: If the granaries are full, we know etiquette, and if we have enough food and clothing, we know honor and disgrace. Food and clothing have been necessary conditions for talking about morality since ancient times. If there is no food and clothing, the people will not be willing to accept the education of sages and improve their inner self, and it is difficult for those with ambition to... "

Chen Sicong's opening remarks lasted for three minutes, which was basically very stable. He mainly explained the truth in a concise manner and used the general trend to figure it out; while the facts were all over the place, and there were few examples of specific and detailed.

The audience who didn't know how to play the role of melon-eating audience listened to it and felt that Chen Sicong's words made sense, and the psychological balance gradually tilted towards him.

However, the players of the Digital Academy of Sciences opposite showed a slight disdain to try.

As the host, Su Qin also frowned slightly.

"Routine! If these words started like this six or seven years ago, it would be quite innovative. Now this systematic sophistry of self-argument is useless. After a while, the Academy of Digital Sciences can only give many examples of "poverty and humbleness that cannot be moved", and can defeat the School of Law in a complete way.

Alas, I didn’t expect that this class of law school is still not good. It seems that they can win the first two games because the Academy of Fine Arts and the Academy of Chemical Sciences are too delicious.”

Su Qin analyzed in his mind.

This question was a narrow victory in the international college debate eight years ago.

Since then, it has been used in low-standard competitions many times, and most of them are the opponent winning.

Although the judges say that this question is fair and that the positive party will not lose if they are not eloquent, Su Qin always feels that this question is not fair based on his own experience.

There is no other reason: the positive side wants to discuss an absolute question, while the negative side wants to discuss an exception question.

This leads to the positive side that can only start from the framework of the theoretical system and tie the fence of "universal theory" tightly, and the opposite side cannot be given an example.

Because even if the positive side gives a hundred examples of "being unable to stick to moral sentiments because of poverty and not being able to feed or subsistence", the negative side can break the positive side's factual argument as long as the negative side takes an example of "poverty and humbleness cannot be moved".

After all, as long as there is a person who "will talk about morality without food and clothing", it is enough to prove that "food and clothing are not a necessary condition for morality."

So, now that he heard that Chen Sicong had no new ideas in the opening argument system structure, he felt that the law school had lost half of it.

Because it was the confrontation stage of mutual questioning and free debate, both sides gave examples to refute each other, and the law school could not give the other party at all.

Soon after three minutes, Chen Sicong had finished the opening statement that Feng Jianxiong wrote for him, which was generally stable and was only slightly more rigorous than his predecessors.

The girls in the law school tried their best to applaud Chen Sicong regardless of whether they could understand it or not.

Several beautiful girls sitting in the front row also asked one of the coolest and capable short-haired beauties, "Sister Mouthful, how do you think Chen's performance is? Will he win!"

The one who is nicknamed "My Mouthful Sister" is Yu Meiqin, the freshman who was previously recognized as the best eloquence in this law school.

She studied earlier than her peers, but she filled in the foreign language major during the college entrance examination the year before. After studying for more than half a year, she felt boring. She decided to drop out of school and repeat the exam in April this year and retake the law major. So although she studied one more year more than others, she was the same age as her classmates.

Because she has more than half a year of college experience than others, Yu Meiqin always feels that those freshmen are as deep as little kids and do not talk much. If she is absent-minded when others talk, she likes to throw a Mexican Eagle Coin to show her contempt.

In today's game, she originally wanted to play. However, Weng Dechen asked her to help manage the new journal, which made her unable to get free. Later, she heard that Weng Dechen handed over the organizational work to Feng Jianxiong, so Yu Meiqin gave up.

Yu Meiqin does not regard people as her identity. Although Feng Jianxiong was a substitute before, Yu Meiqin had no bad impression of the classmates in the next class. She felt that Feng Jianxiong was a person with clear ideas and keen insights. As long as she practiced her courage to speak in front of others, she would definitely be a troll in time.

"Sister Mouthful, why don't you speak?"

Yu Meiqin was thinking about it carefully, but was repeatedly pushed by the girl around her and finally woke up.

"Ah...I don't think that Student Chen's argument is new..."

She said this, but she was not disappointed with Chen Sicong in her heart. Because she had worked with Chen Sicong twice, she knew that the other party had the only level of "programming based on Baidu and library search results".

On the contrary, looking at Chen Sicong's dullness, what flashed through Yu Meiqin's disappointment was Feng Jianxiong's disappointment.

"Weng Dechen taught you the organization and rehearsal of this game, but you can't even come up with a new perspective. I know that you will blush when you speak in front of girls, but the off-site staff's ideas should be very clear. What exactly did it happen?"

...

After the opening statement of the Law School, the host Su Qin briefly commented on two sentences in a private manner, and then signaled the opposition to make a speech.

After talking about the opening statements of the opposing side, the main theoretical system is nothing more than "people cannot live just for food, and there are many more noble existences worth pursuing."

At the end of the opening statement, he did not forget to add, "Boyi Shuqi would rather starve to death at the foot of Shouyang Mountain than eat Zhou grain. Since ancient times, there are countless people with kindness and ambition like Boyi Shuqi. It can be seen that people who are about to starve to death can also talk about morality."

This speech basically tied with Chen Sicong. The theoretical system is not so complete, and the self-confidence and argumentation are not strict, and it depends more on one hammer and another hammer.

However, whether it is a judge like Su Qin or an audience like Yu Meiqin, they all know that the opposition side is a merit in making decisions.

Because the advantage of the opposing side in this game is to give special examples, rather than to talk about the theoretical system in general.

Being able to barely tie the pro-party in the first stage, even if it has a slight disadvantage, is considered to have achieved strategic goals.

The match lasted eight minutes, and the second debate between the two sides began to ask each other's preset questions.

From theory to examples, the Academy of Digital Sciences has made progresses layer by layer:

"I would like to ask the other debater: Confucius said: People have no intention of likes and dislikes, but they are not humans. People are rational and able to talk about morality. Isn't this the difference between humans and animals?"

"Yan Hui was eating and drinking, and was still 'loving and trustworthy in his words and respectful in his actions'. Du Fu had no place to live, and was still noble and honest and proud and lamented, "How can he have thousands of houses to shelter all the poor people in the world to be happy with each other' - I would like to ask the other debater, are these examples not enough to prove that people can still talk about morality without satisfying their food and clothing?"

At the Law School, the second debater Fu Yiming was a little panicked and didn't know how to use specific examples to refute it. He just carried the positive theoretical system to fight the panacea:

"Optical debaters, please pay attention. Whether it is Yan Hui or Du Fu, they did not freeze to death. The examples you gave can only prove that they are in poor material conditions, but that is not a desperate situation where they are not even satisfied with basic food and clothing.

We have never ruled out that some people with lofty ideals have stronger willpower than ordinary people, and can still talk about morality at a threshold far below the limit of normal people's tolerance for material things. But for them, those moments can still be considered as 'food and food'."

This principle was just said by Feng Jianxiong just now and instructed Fu Yiming to bite him to death like this.

That is, no matter what example the other party gives, you must fight back, "Poverty does not mean that you don't have enough food and clothing. Everyone has different willpower, and the threshold for food and clothing is naturally different."

Although this view cannot completely solve the problem, no matter what example the other party gives, it can reduce the other party's proof power by more or less.

As long as Fu Yiming insists on killing this sentence, it will lead to the ineffectiveness of many inescapable examples of the opposition. In the end, we can only give the most extreme examples of Boyi and Shuqi, "will rather die than surrender until they starve to death."

At the same time, Fu Yiming took the initiative to counterattack and asked questions, but it seemed that there was no strength. The judges and the wise audience shouted that they couldn't understand it.

For example, the question raised by Fu Yiming includes: "I would like to ask the other debater, you gave Du Fu's experience of his feelings, saying that Du Fu hopes to have millions of houses, but can this example prove that Du Fu is just talking about morality? Maybe he just complained like the angry youth and hoped to redistribute wealth without constructively?"

The three opportunities to ask questions were almost all about "Some things that people who can't even eat enough to eat have done, but are they really talking about morality?"

Although each level is progressing, its attack power is not systematic enough in the eyes of professionals.

Such a debate has made the second and third debaters of the Academy of Digital Sciences become restless in an advantageous state.

The two of them looked at each other, and their inner activities were tacitly understood:

"Damn it! Are these people in the law school rogues? We have given so many examples, and they have repeatedly said such uninspiring excuses as 'so poor and still can't be considered as food and clothing', are they of good quality? Just know this sentence? No, then give them some extreme examples of really sacrificing their lives to be moral, and kill them completely!"

While the contestants of the School of Digital Sciences were despising Fu Yiming in their hearts, the host Su Qin also frowned and thought: "What do the law school wants to do? The fight is so messy. It is meaningless to refute the specific examples given by the other party one by one.

The so-called "necessary conditions" logically, that is, "there is no need for something, and the loss is not necessary." As long as the opposing side proves that there is no food and clothing, it is enough to talk about morality. It is enough to have an example to stand firm. What the opposing side wants to argue is that without food and clothing, it is absolutely impossible to talk about morality. The opposing side fights an example war with the opposing side, which is simply suicide!"

Off the field, Yu Meiqin's mood was gradually sinking.

At this moment, most of the melon-eating girls who had just watched the fun before had already seen the winner.

The situation on the positive side is too unfavorable.

"No, it seems like I'm taking date pills!"

There are also some girls from law school who have figured out the topic themselves and feel that they are inclined toward the opposing side's point of view, so they start to cheer: "Is this debate topic unfair at all? One side just needs to give special examples, but the other side wants to prove an absolute point of view. No matter how you look at it, it is the opposing side who is lucky!"

This noisy aroused some resonance, but the audience of the Academy of Sciences, who had a cheap and good-looking audience immediately became unhappy and booed back.

"Silent! Silent! Please be calm for the audience!"

Faced with the chaotic order of the arena, Su Qin had to maintain order again. "Next, please ask the third debater of the pros and confront Feng Jianxiong to ask the last three questions, and then enter the free debate stage."

Feng Jianxiong got up leisurely, cleared his throat, and asked in a calm and even tone:
Chapter completed!