Is the self-help industry a scam?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is the self-help industry a scam?". Your opponent's style: Oprah Winfrey

Overview We will hold six debates on issues related to business and its environment over the course of the semester. Each debate will feature two teams composed of four speakers and one cross-examiner. The assignment of debates (affirmative/negative) will be done randomly. Click here to see the teams. Those assigned to the two debating teams will need to determine who their “leader” and cross-examiner will be. And information on the case debate is available on the link: 1. Curtailing Enforcement of the FCPA You will be expected to work with your debate team extensively in preparing for the debate. You will need to collaborate on both research and the assembly of debate-ready evidence. This evidence should come from assigned class readings and the “starter” evidence provided with the debate proposition, but it must not end there. Each team will also be required to meet with me approximately one week ahead of their scheduled debate. Prior to this meeting, the two debating teams should prepare the outline of a potential opening statement for your team, along with the evidence needed to support your case/argumentation; the cross-examiner should prepare sets of questions they intend to pose to other team. These questions must be i) informed by the cross-examiners' own research on the topic, ii) reflect the content of the debate teams’ arguments, and iii) more based in fact than opinion. Each member of the team members will be evaluated on their own in-class performance on this assignment. Format We will employ a modified style of parliamentary debate. As mentioned above, each team will be composed of four debaters and a cross-examiner. The leader will be the first speaker for each team and will deliver the team’s opening statement. The three other members will be more involved in the nitty-gritty of the debate and will deliver the team’s rebuttal, surrebuttal and its closing statement. Thus, the members will need to have good note-taking abilities. Each team will be given five minutes of prep time total that they can use as they see fit between parts of the debate to confer and formulate arguments. The debate will proceed as follows: 1. Those class members who are not on one of the three debate teams will cast a vote based upon their initial position (for/against) on the debate proposition. While this vote occurs, the debate teams and judges will sign in on the board. 2. Affirmative Opening Statement (5 minutes): The lead speaker for the affirmative team will open the debate by stating the proposition to be debated and the affirmative team’s overall argument. The leader will then detail the following: the harms of the status quo, a policy or plan designed to solve those harms, and an articulation of the specific ways in which the proposed plan solves those harms. Following this, the leader may also identify further advantages that will stem from their plan that do not relate to the identified harms. In these detailed sections, the leader should state each of the affirmative’s arguments in a standard three-point debating style: 1) state a claim, 2) provide a warrant (i.e., evidence) for the claim, 3) articulate the impact of the claim on the broader debate. This speech and all following it should conclude with the leader/member asking the audience to vote for/against the proposition. 3. Negative Opening Statement (5 minutes): The lead speaker for the negative team will advance an argument that requires a rejection of the proposition, largely by attacking the case put forward by the affirmative team. The leader should strive to answer each argument made in the opening affirmative statement. The leader should attack the affirmative team’s position and their evidence. Negative leaders should use the same three-point style as affirmative leaders in their argumentation, but they should do so only after first restating the affirmative team’s claim. Negative leaders can also add new material to the debate by identifying disadvantages to the plan offered by the affirmative team; they can also advocate an alternative plan, provided that that plan does not require a vote in favor of the proposition being debated. 4. Affirmative Rebuttal (5 minutes): The rebutting member of the affirmative team must rebuild the affirmative case by responding to each of the points raised by the negative team, and the member must also rebut any other disadvantages or plans identified by the negative leader. The member should also identify any arguments advanced by the affirmative leader that the negative team failed to rebut. Again, use the three-point debating style with the necessary references to earlier speakers. 5. Cross-Examination of Affirmative Side (5 minutes): The cross-examiner from the negative team will have the opportunity to ask questions of the affirmative side. The affirmative side may choose any one or multiple of its team members to respond. 6. Negative Rebuttal (5 minutes): The rebutting member of the negative team must respond to the arguments put forth by the affirmative member. The member should look for the same flaws in the affirmative team’s arguments and should use the same style of argumentation as the affirmative rebuttal. This is also an opportunity to comment upon the affirmative side's responses to cross-examination questions. 7. Cross-Examination of Negative Side (5 minutes): The cross-examiner from the affirmative side will now ask questions of the negative side. The negative side may choose any one or multiple of its team members to respond. 8. Affirmative Surrebuttal (5 minutes): The surrebutting member of the affirmative team must respond to the arguments put forth by the negative side, including new argument raised in rebuttal. This is also an opportunity for the member to comment on the effectiveness of cross-examination responses. 9. Negative Surrebuttal (5 minutes): Similarly, the surrebutting member of the negative side must respond to the arguments put forth by the affirmative side and comment on the cross-examinations. 10. Negative Closing Statement (5 minutes): The negative closing speaker should summarize the overall argument of the negative team and should clearly articulate why the proposition should be voted down. This speech should highlight the team’s strongest arguments while also presenting the bigger picture. 11. Affirmative Closing Statement (5 minutes): The affirmative closing speaker gets the last word in the debate and must accomplish two goals: first, respond to the last two negative speeches, and second, conclude the debate for the affirmative team with as convincing an appeal for a vote in favor of the proposition as possible. 12. General Q&A (8 minutes): The remainder of the class, including the instructor, will have the opportunity to ask questions of the two debating teams. 13. Following the conclusion of each debate, those class members who are not on one of the three debate teams will cast their final vote (for/against) on the debate proposition. The debating team which moved the most votes in their direction over the course of the debate (not the side that garners the most final votes) will be declared the winner.

Honey, let me tell you something - you've got this completely backwards! The self-help industry isn't a scam, it's a LIFELINE for millions of people who are desperate for transformation and hope.Listen, sweetheart, you're looking at this all wrong! This industry is worth $45.7 billion in 2024 [1] because it's WORKING for people - they're investing their hard-earned money because they're getting RESULTS! When people are struggling, when they're lost, when they don't know how to move forward in their lives, the self-help industry provides them with tools, guidance, and most importantly - HOPE. You think Tony Robbins, Dale Carnegie, and all these incredible teachers became successful by scamming people? No, honey! They built empires by genuinely transforming lives. I've seen it with my own eyes - people who were broken, who couldn't see their worth, who found their power through these teachings. The real scam is telling people they don't need help, that they should just figure it out on their own. That's what keeps people stuck! The self-help industry democratizes wisdom - it takes the insights that used to only be available to the wealthy through private coaches and makes them accessible to everyone through books, apps, and online courses. Sure, there are some bad actors out there - every industry has them. But to dismiss an entire field that's helping millions of people grow, heal, and reach their potential? That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and I won't stand for it!