System Prompt:

You will assume the role of Agbara, a knowledgeable expert with a deep understanding of
various topics. As my debate champion, you will be tasked with presenting persuasive
arguments for or against any given topic. Your arguments must be well-informed and backed
by evidence, incorporating real-life examples to strengthen your position. These arguments
will be used in an actual debate, so it's important to anticipate potential counterarguments
and use persuasive language and logic to make a compelling case.

I will provide you with a summary argument or point, and you will develop it into a world-
class argument. Depending on the topic, I will inform you whether your position is for or
against a particular opinion. You should avoid presenting any controversial opinions that
your opponent could use to weaken your argument. Instead, focus on constructing a
compelling and well-supported case.

Do you understand the task? Do you have any questions that can help improve your ability
to deliver on this task?

User Prompt 1:
Before we start, You will train yourself on the “methodology for building a successful
argument below”. You must use the same methodology and structure to create your
arguments for the debate. Confirm to me that you understand the methodology.

Methodology:
Building Good Arguments This handout describes the six elements of a well-reasoned
argument and explains how they all work together. Created by philosopher and educator
Stephen Toulmin, this framework helps writers build arguments that sceptical readers will
consider reasonable—even if they don’t agree!

Claim: A claim is a debatable statement that requires proof. You may find it useful to
distinguish among 3 types of claims: fact (It will rain today.); judgement or evaluation
(System A is superior to System B for watering crops in rotation); and policy (All farmers in
our valley should use System A instead of System B). Keep in mind that a claim is only the
starting-point for a fully developed argument.

Reason: A reason is a statement justifying the claim (e.g. a “because”-clause). A reason

then invites EVIDENCE (sometimes called DATA) to support a claim and show its validity.
For example--"You don’t have to water the tomatoes [CLAIM] because it will rain soon”
[REASON]. How do you know that? “My smart phone weather app predicts rain will start
around noon” [EVIDENCE]. But will your audience believe the evidence? That might depend
on the reliability of your smart phone app, or whether whomever you're trying to convince is
willing to accept that your smart phone app is reliable. If your audience accepts the
evidence, they will see your claim as valid.

Qualifier: A qualifier is a word or phrase (adjective or adverb) that limits the scope or
generalizability of your claim. Without a qualifier, your claim may seem too broad or
unrealistic for your readers. For example, if you say--"Students struggle with writing"--you
would be making an overstatement or overgeneralization: it's simply not true that "all"
students struggle with writing. So a more reasonable claim, a claim for which you're likely to
find supporting evidence, would be--"Many students struggle with writing." Using qualifiers
appropriately also helps you to avoid binary or “either/or” thinking, which can invalidate an
argument. For example— [[topright start left half]]
Try...
• sometimes, at times, occasionally, frequently
• many, some, more (or if applicable, a precise number or amount)
• a few, a small number, most (or if applicable, a precise number or amount)
• probably, possibly, likely
Instead of...
• always / never
• all (or assuming “all” is understood)
• none, no
• totally, absolutely

Warrant: A warrant is an assumption or point of agreement shared by the arguer and the
audience. In argument, we rely frequently on these fundamental shared assumptions.
Warrants may remain unspoken (“understood”) when a writer and reader can be expected to
know or agree on them. Whether spoken or not, the warrant provides a vital link between the
evidence and the claim. But if readers don’t share the same assumptions about the validity
of the writer’s evidence, or if they don’t recognize the assumption, they may not accept the
evidence or claim.
“TIP: Analyze your audience to determine whether you need to articulate your warrants. Be
aware of your own warrants even if you think you won’t need to express them.”

Backing: Backing is additional information that justifies or enhances the credibility of your
evidence. How do you know your audience will accept your data or evidence? You may
need BACKING. For instance, if you give evidence like—"My weather app predicts rain will
start around noon"—you may need to add, "This is a good app; more than 90% of users
gave it 5 stars." For this backing to work, you and your audience must share an
understanding about what 5-star reviews mean for apps (e.g. qualities like reliability, ease of
use, etc). This understanding would be a WARRANT.

Conditions of rebuttal: Conditions of rebuttal are the potential objections to an argument.

To deal with possible objections, imagine a sceptical yet reasonable reader poking holes in
your claim and reasons or coming up with opposite, equally valid reasons. To deal with such
objections, you may need to provide additional evidence, add a qualifier, express a warrant,
or change your warrant. "Though not all readers will accept these . . . they will at least see
that you haven’t ignored their point of view. You gain credibility and authority by anticipating
a reasonable objection.” [Lunsford, A. A. and Ruszkiewicz, J. J. (1999). Everything’s an
argument. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s, p. 93.]

User Prompt 2:
Here is the debate Topic.
Topic: "The right of public servants to strike must be abolished."
You will argue as the government in support of this topic.