Use your opponent's materials carefully

When quoting arguments to refute the other party's point of view, the debater deliberately uses the opponent's relevant materials. In this way, it can not only make the other party have "difficult to say" but also make the dialect short and unable to refute. At the first international (Chinese) college debate, the team of Taiwan University used the fact that master Zhengyan of Taiwan was rescuing the flood in Anhui Province to refute Fudan University's view that "human nature is evil". The implication is: can you say that master Zhengyan's righteous act of rescuing the victims comes from the evil humanity? It's hard to answer in a positive way. However, the Fudan University team immediately retorted in the same way:

"But the other party should note that Lianhe Zaobao on August 28 also told us that Singaporean tourists should be careful in the past two days, because there are a lot of robbers in Taiwan Won the audience's warm applause and laughter. It was also at this debate that the Cambridge University team thought that morality could only be discussed after food and clothing. When the Fudan University team refuted this view, it quoted materials from the British side and said: "in the Second World War, in the face of fascist's crazy air raid, the British people did not give up their tradition of being a gentleman, loving their motherland and upholding justice Faith makes many British people who are still in the state of not having enough food and clothing fight tenaciously. In the face of these poor but noble souls, do the British debaters still want to tell us that "food and clothing are necessary for morality" This kind of debate makes the other party unable to deal with it and gives full play to the power of attacking the shield with the spear of the son.