Who or what group is disadvantaged by this proposal? Can the proposal logistically be implemented? Who would be in charge of overseeing whether or not the proposal is carried out? Will the proposal apply to all people or in all situations? Are there exceptions to the proposal? What do you mean when you say…? What examples can you provide that support this proposal? Is the evidence relevant? Biased? Misrepresented? How are you defining the words and ‘eliminate’ ‘sports’?” 2. Consider proposals from other people’s perspectives Speaker: should uphold Proposition 8 in order to ban same-sex “The Supreme Court marriages.” Advocate: about the 40,000 children in California who live with same-sex Devil’s “What parents? Do these children have a right to voice their opinion in this matter? Has anyone asked them what they think about giving full recognition and legal status to their parents?” 3. Think of comparable scenarios that refute the original claim Speaker: should call for an end to NSA government surveillance of “President Obama and e-mail records because it violates the Americans’ phone fourth amendment’s protection against warrantless search and seizures.” Advocate: have to have a warrant to search a passenger before Devil’s “TSA employees don’t boarding a plane. Are they in violation of the fourth amendment?” 4. Pose hypothetical situations to clarify issues Speaker: town of Greece, New York should allow prayer before town “The board meetings.” Advocate: a devil worshiper wanted to pray to the devil? Would this be an Devil’s “Suppose acceptable understanding of your position on public prayer?” 5. Pose alternative explanations or solutions to problems Speaker: 35 ft. buffer zone should be created around abortion clinics in Massachusetts “A because protestors are blocking the entrance and heckling patients going in to receive an abortion.” Advocate: are other ways to deal with the problem of blocking the entrance, such Devil’s “There as prosecuting people for obstructing the entrance. Instead of making a blanket statement that infringes on the freedom of speech of everyone, police could arrest only those protestors who are blocking the entrance.”
Who or what group is disadvantaged by this proposal? Can the proposal logistically be implemented? Who would be in charge of overseeing whether or not the proposal is carried out? Will the proposal apply to all people or in all situations? Are there exceptions to the proposal? What do you mean when you say…? What examples can you provide that support this proposal? Is the evidence relevant? Biased? Misrepresented? How are you defining the words ‘eliminate’ and ‘sports’?” 2. Consider proposals from other people’s perspectives Speaker: “The Supreme Court should uphold Proposition 8 in order to ban same-sex marriages.” Devil’s Advocate: “What about the 40,000 children in California who live with same-sex parents? Do these children have a right to voice their opinion in this matter? Has anyone asked them what they think about giving full recognition and legal status to their parents?” 3. Think of comparable scenarios that refute the original claim Speaker: “President Obama should call for an end to NSA government surveillance of Americans’ phone and e-mail records because it violates the fourth amendment’s protection against warrantless search and seizures.” Devil’s Advocate: “TSA employees don’t have to have a warrant to search a passenger before boarding a plane. Are they in violation of the fourth amendment?” 4. Pose hypothetical situations to clarify issues Speaker: “The town of Greece, New York should allow prayer before town board meetings.” Devil’s Advocate: “Suppose a devil worshiper wanted to pray to the devil? Would this be an acceptable understanding of your position on public prayer?” 5. Pose alternative explanations or solutions to problems Speaker: “A 35 ft. buffer zone should be created around abortion clinics in Massachusetts because protestors are blocking the entrance and heckling patients going in to receive an abortion.” Devil’s Advocate: “There are other ways to deal with the problem of blocking the entrance, such as prosecuting people for obstructing the entrance. Instead of making a blanket statement that infringes on the freedom of speech of everyone, police could arrest only those protestors who are blocking the entrance.”