Final answer:
When debating the topic "Corruption is better than armed robbery," the debater should introduce the issue, present a clear viewpoint, detail arguments supporting each side, refute counterpoints, encourage audience engagement, and consider ethical implications. The conclusion should tie together these elements, and the correct approach includes all the above strategies. Option D is the correct answer.
Step-by-step explanation:
Starting a Debate on Corruption vs. Armed Robbery
To start a debate on the topic: "Corruption is better than armed robbery", a comprehensive approach should be taken. The debater should introduce the issue by providing context and explaining the terms. It is crucial to present a clear, definite viewpoint while being empathetic to the opposition. Exploring both the moral implications and societal impact of each crime helps in understanding the complexity of the subject.
Arguments supporting each side should be detailed, allowing the audience to understand the reasoning behind each stance. Refuting counterpoints further strengthens the debater's position. Evidence to support the stance should be factual, relevant, and compelling, and debaters should encourage audience participation to foster engagement and a multifaceted discussion.
Throughout the debate, it is key to consider the ethical implications of the arguments presented. The conclusion should encapsulate the arguments, reflecting on how the stance taken aligns with broader societal values and the implications of tolerating either corruption or armed robbery.
The correct answer to how one should start a debate on this topic is d. All of the above, encompassing a multifaceted approach to debating which includes presenting the arguments for both sides, encouraging audience participation, and considering the ethical implications of the discussion.