Debate in Actual Life.  The most marked difference between debates in the two phases of life is the difference of form.  In academic circles debate is a well-regulated game between matched sides.  In actual life only in certain professions are the rules well defined.  In most cases the debating is disguised under different forms, though the essential purposes and methods are the same.

Debate between lawyers in courts—­technically termed pleading—­is the most formal of all professional debating.  Its regulations are found in the stabilized court procedure which every lawyer must master and obey.

Much looser than the formal debate of the court room is the speech-making of the legislative organization from the lowest township board meeting up to the Senate of the United States.  Of course the members of such bodies are regulated by certain restrictions, but the speeches are not likely to be curbed in time as are academic performances, nor are the speakers likely to follow a prearranged order, nor are they always equally balanced in number, nor do they agree so carefully upon “team work.”  Sometimes in a legislative body the first speaker may be on the negative side, which is quite contrary to all the rules of regularly conducted debates.  All the speakers may also be on one side of a measure, the opposing side not deigning to reply, resting secure in the knowledge of how many votes they can control when the real test of power comes.

Most informal of all are the general discussions in which business matters are decided.  In these the speeches are never so set as in the two preceding kinds.  The men are less formal in their relations and addresses to one another.  The steps are less marked in their changes.  Yet underneath the seeming lack of regulation there is the framework of debate, for there is always present the sense of two sides upon every proposition, whether it be the purchase of new office equipment for a distant agent, an increase of salary for employees, or the increase of capitalization.  Certain speakers support some proposition.  Others oppose it until they are convinced and won over to the affirmative side, or until they are out-voted.

Two men seated in an office may themselves be debaters, audience, and judges of their own argumentative opinions.  They may in themselves fill all the requirements of a real debate.  They deliver the speeches on the affirmative and negative sides.  Each listens to the arguments of his opponent.  And finally, the pair together give a decision upon the merits of the arguments presented.

On all such occasions the speakers need and use just those qualities which classroom training has developed in them—­knowledge of material, plan of presentation, skill in expression, conviction and persuasion of manner, graceful acceptance of defeat.

Debating Demands a Decision.  Debating goes one step farther than merely argumentative speaking.  Debating demands a decision upon the case, it requires a judgment, a registered action.  Again in this respect it is like a game.