Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

Topics to be Debated:
➢ Are humans innately good or innately evil?

Affirmative: INNATELY EVIL Negative: INNATELY GOOD

➢ What makes human life valuable: values or wealth?

Affirmative: WEALTH Negative: VALUES

➢ It takes a village to educate a child . . . agree or disagree?

Affirmative: DISAGREE Negative: AGREE

➢ Are we happier now as a society than in past times . . . why or why not?

Affirmative: WHY NOT Negative: WHY

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

The Mechanics for the Debate

1. In each debate, there will be two teams of three speakers. Each team will choose three members from the
opposing team as speakers. It means that each team member of the team will prepare in accordance to the
given topic/s of the debate.
2. The opposing teams will draw or pick to determine who will represent either the positive argument or the
negative argument.
3. The team that supports the topic is known as the positive, while the team that disagrees the topic is referred
to as the negative.
4. In the first round, the team that represents either the positive argument or the negative argument will be
given 2-minute speech (120-Second) for each speaker. Since there are three speakers in each team, the
speaking team will be given six minutes, and it will depend on the speaking team on how it will be used or
managed.
5. In the second round, it will be “the rebuttals,” and the debate moderator will determine the flow of the
rebuttals.
6. In the final round, each team will choose a speaker for the final speech and will be given 3-minute speech
(180-Second).
7. During the event, specific time period will be marked out with service bell (or by using any other means).
8. Each speaker must carefully adhere to the mechanics and restrictions.
9. Every speaker that talks longer than the allotted period will lose points (2 points for every 10 seconds).
10. The judges’ verdict must be deemed final and irrevocable upon submission of the results to the committee.
11. The committee, through the adjudicator, will announce the winners of the debate.

The Criteria for Judging:

1. Clarity of Ideas 25%

The student-speaker appears at ease and speaks with a good volume, clear enunciation, and nonverbal clues.
2. Originality of Thought 25%
The audiences’ reactions show that the speech was delivered effectively and persuasively.
3. Logical Presentation 25%
The speech is cogently organized – meaning, it is convincing and powerful, has a distinct thesis, and is
delivered.
4. Timeliness and “Themeliness” 25%
The student-speaker deals with “the signs of the times” and respond to the “challenges of the theme.”

Total of 100%

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

Speaker Roles

Debating is a team sport – you must work together when preparing your case or argument during the debate. Each
speaker within the team has a certain role to play. It is important that each speaker understands and fulfils their role.

These speaker roles might sound a bit restrictive, but they help the debate run smoothly and clearly, so that everyone
in the room understands what the debate is about and what each team stands for.

In each debate, there are two teams of three speakers. The team which argues for the topic is called the affirmative.
The team arguing against the topic is called the negative. Each speaker speaks once for a defined period. The order of
speakers is: first affirmative, first negative, second affirmative, second negative, third affirmative, third negative.
Following this final speech, the debating component is done, and the adjudicator takes time to give feedback and
award the win.

First Affirmative

The first affirmative’s role is to set out their team’s interpretation of the topic (the contention/team case), define the
topic, outline the team split, and present arguments.

Define the topic

The first task of the first affirmative speaker is to define the topic. The definition specifies the important issue(s) in
contention, and places boundaries on the issues that can be argued in the debate. Certain words will have vague or
multiple meanings. The definition should note the meaning of key words in the topic. Definitions of words do not need
to be dictionary definitions/quote directly from the dictionary.

For example, if the topic was ‘that we should ban junk food in schools,’ the words which are vague and may need
definition are: we, junk food, and, schools. Defining ‘we’ says who or where the topic applies (Australia, Victoria, the
world). Defining ‘schools’ says what is being impacted - is it primary, secondary schools, or both? Defining ‘junk food’
notes the subject, and can be used to include certain foods, or exclude certain foods. However, as there is a common
sense understanding of what junk food is, it can be fine to just say ‘junk food’ if the affirmative team wants. The words
in the topic like ‘that’, ‘should’, ‘ban’ and ‘in’ don’t require definition as they are not the issues of contention.

A definition can be short, and to the point. Using the sample topic, the first affirmative could define the topic in their
speech as: ‘we define the topic to mean that Australia should ban junk food from all schools, both primary and
secondary.’

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

The team split

It is essential to let the audience know early on in the debate exactly which way your team will be heading and the
approach they will be taking to the debate. The split introduces the first and second speakers, and notes what their
arguments will be.

Present arguments

First and second speakers of both teams present the arguments. The arguments said by the first speaker should be
different, and not overlap, with the arguments of the second speaker. The arguments should be supporting your
team’s contention (agreeing or disagreeing with the topic). The first affirmative should present the arguments
allocated to the first speaker.

First Negative

The role of the first negative is very similar to the first affirmative. The first negative’s role is to outlines their team’s
contention, team split, rebut the arguments of the first affirmative, and present arguments.

The main difference between first affirmative and negative is that the first affirmative defines the topic, which the first
negative does not (typically) do so, and, that the first negative offers rebuttal.

The Definitional Challenge

In most circumstances, the definition provided by the affirmative is sufficient for the debate. On occasion, the negative
may have a substantial disagreement with the definition provided by the Affirmative. If this is the case, then these
must be dealt with immediately. To successfully challenge the definition, the first negative must prove to the
adjudicator that they have the most reasonable definition (thus showing the affirmative’s definition was not
reasonable).

Rebuttal

A rebuttal is a counterargument. The speaker should attack the main theme of the affirmative argument, as well as
the specific issues raised by the first affirmative speaker. It is important to remember that you are rebutting the
arguments the opposing speaker has raised, not the opposing speaker personally.

Outline team split

Like the first affirmative, they should give an outline of the team case and the arguments to be dealt with by each
speaker.

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

Present arguments

First and second speakers of both teams present the arguments. The arguments said by the first speaker should be
different, and not overlap, with the arguments of the second speaker. The arguments should be supporting your
team’s contention (agreeing or disagreeing with the topic). The first negative should present the arguments allocated
to the first speaker.

Second Affirmative & Second Negative

The second speakers of both teams have the same speaker role. They both rebut their opposition’s arguments, and
present their own arguments.

Defend the definition if necessary

If there are any definitional issues in the debate, then these need to be dealt with and hopefully fully cleared up. Both
speakers should keep in mind, like the first negative, that they are trying to prove that their definition is the most
reasonable.

Rebuttal

Each speaker should attack the main arguments of their opponents. The second affirmative should clearly identify the
major areas of disagreement with the with the negative case and attack the specific arguments of the first negative.

The second negative needs to attack the main arguments of the affirmative, focusing on the specific arguments raised
by the second affirmative.

Present arguments

The speaker should then present their allocated arguments.

Third Affirmative & Negative

The third speakers of both teams have the same role: to rebut their opposition’s arguments, and to summarise their
team’s arguments.

Third speakers do not present arguments! New matter is illegal from the third speaker from the Negative, and whilst
it is legal for the third Affirmative speaker to introduce new material, you are best advised to leave that speaker as
much time as possible for rebuttal. If it is an important argument, it should not be left to the last speaker in your team!

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

Rebuttal

The third speaker should rebut all the arguments raised by their opposition across the debate, not just the arguments
raised by the speaker before them. They should to present an overview by analysing the main themes of the debate.
They should identify the essential issues on which the teams have disagreed, rebut the important arguments of the
opposing team and defend any important attacks made against their own team’s case.

Summary of their team’s arguments

Both speakers should conclude their speech with a brief summary of their teams’ case.

First Quarter:

Topics to be discussed:

1. The Nature, Goals, and Perspective of Anthropology, Sociology and Political Science;
2. The Concept, Aspect, and Change in/of Culture and Society;
3. The Cultural Relativism;
4. The Significance of Cultural and Social Symbols and Practices;
5. The Political and Economic Symbols and Practice;
6. The Context, Content, Processes, and Consequences of Socialization; and
7. The Forms and Functions of Social Organization.

Most Essential Learning Competencies (MELCs):

✓ Discuss the nature, goals and perspectives in/of anthropology, sociology and political science;
✓ Analyze the concept, aspects and changes in/of culture and society;
✓ Explain the importance of cultural relativism in attaining cultural understanding;
✓ Analyze the significance of cultural, social, political and economic symbols and practices;
✓ Explain the context, content, processes, and consequences of socialization; and
✓ Analyze the forms and functions of social organizations.

Logic is in us!

Logic as a science is grounded in the recognition of the ordered operations of the human intellect. In fact, it is natural
to us. In many affairs, we have to be logical!

What is Logic?

It is the science and art of correct thinking!

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
Thinking is not just any kind of thinking. It is NOT fantasizing, but remembering, understanding, analyzing, applying,
evaluating, creating, classifying, defining, arguing, and comparing!

It is directed toward the attainment of truth and the elaboration upon knowledge previously attained.

Correct thinking means that we ourselves can check. Why? Because there are rules to follow.

Science is a system and is something organized.

Art is of order and ease.

What is a Fallacy?

The Nature of Fallacy:

A Fallacy is a false judgment that appears to be TRUE! It is an APPARENT TRUTH. It is hidden error, a disorder in the
reasoning process that cannot be easily be detected because it seems to be based on something true.

16 Common Logical Fallacies and How to Spot Them

Written by Karla Hesterberg @krla_cook
Strengthen your psychology skills with HubSpot's free guide.
(This article was published in July 2018 and has been updated for comprehensiveness.
Originally published Jul 26, 2022 7:00:00 AM, updated July 26 2022)

Logical fallacies — those logical gaps that invalidate arguments — aren't always easy to spot.

While some come in the form of loud, glaring inconsistencies, others can easily fly under the radar, sneaking into
everyday meetings and conversations undetected.

Our guide on logical fallacies will help you build better arguments and identify logical missteps.

What is a logical fallacy?

Logical fallacies are deceptive or false arguments that may seem stronger than they actually are due to psychological
persuasion, but are proven wrong with reasoning and further examination.
These mistakes in reasoning typically consist of an argument and a premise that does not support the conclusion.
There are two types of fallacies: formal and informal.

• Formal: Formal fallacies are arguments that have invalid structure, form, or context errors.
• Informal: Informal fallacies are arguments that have irrelevant or incorrect premises.

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
Understanding the basic logical fallacies can help you more confidently parse the arguments and claims you participate
in and witness on a daily basis — separating fact from sharply dressed fiction.

16 Common Logical Fallacies

1. The Straw Man Fallacy

This fallacy occurs when your opponent over-simplifies or misrepresents your argument (i.e., setting up a "straw man")
to make it easier to attack or refute. Instead of fully addressing your actual argument, speakers relying on this fallacy
present a superficially similar — but ultimately not equal — version of your real stance, helping them create the illusion
of easily defeating you.

Example:

John: I think we should hire someone to redesign our website.

Lola: You're saying we should throw our money away on external resources instead of building up our in-house design
team? That's going to hurt our company in the long run.

2. The Bandwagon Fallacy

Just because a significant population of people believe a proposition is true, doesn't automatically make it true.
Popularity alone is not enough to validate an argument, though it's often used as a standalone justification of validity.
Arguments in this style don't take into account whether or not the population validating the argument is actually
qualified to do so, or if contrary evidence exists.

While most of us expect to see bandwagon arguments in advertising (e.g., "three out of four people think X brand
toothpaste cleans teeth best"), this fallacy can easily sneak its way into everyday meetings and conversations.

Example:

The majority of people believe advertisers should spend more money on billboards, so billboards are objectively the
best form of advertisement.

3. The Appeal to Authority Fallacy

While appeals to authority are by no means always fallacious, they can quickly become dangerous when you rely too
heavily on the opinion of a single person — especially if that person is attempting to validate something outside of
their expertise.

Getting an authority figure to back your proposition can be a powerful addition to an existing argument, but it can't
be the pillar your entire argument rests on. Just because someone in a position of power believes something to be
true, doesn't make it true.

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

Example:

Despite the fact that our Q4 numbers are much lower than usual, we should push forward using the same strategy
because our CEO Barbara says this is the best approach.

4. The False Dilemma Fallacy

This common fallacy misleads by presenting complex issues in terms of two inherently opposed sides. Instead of
acknowledging that most (if not all) issues can be thought of on a spectrum of possibilities and stances, the false
dilemma fallacy asserts that there are only two mutually exclusive outcomes.

This fallacy is particularly problematic because it can lend false credence to extreme stances, ignoring opportunities
for compromise or chances to re-frame the issue in a new way.

Example:

We can either agree with Barbara's plan, or just let the project fail. There is no other option.

5. The Hasty Generalization Fallacy

This fallacy occurs when someone draws expansive conclusions based on inadequate or insufficient evidence. In other
words, they jump to conclusions about the validity of a proposition with some — but not enough — evidence to back
it up, and overlook potential counterarguments.

Example:

Two members of my team have become more engaged employees after taking public speaking classes. That proves we
should have mandatory public speaking classes for the whole company to improve employee engagement.

6. The Slothful Induction Fallacy

Slothful induction is the exact inverse of the hasty generalization fallacy above. This fallacy occurs when sufficient
logical evidence strongly indicates a particular conclusion is true, but someone fails to acknowledge it, instead
attributing the outcome to coincidence or something unrelated entirely.

Example:

Even though every project Brad has managed in the last two years has run way behind schedule, I still think we can
chalk it up to unfortunate circumstances, not his project management skills.

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
7. The Correlation/Causation Fallacy

If two things appear to be correlated, this doesn't necessarily indicate that one of those things irrefutably caused the
other thing. This might seem like an obvious fallacy to spot, but it can be challenging to catch in practice — particularly
when you really want to find a correlation between two points of data to prove your point.

Example:

Our blog views were down in April. We also changed the color of our blog header in April. This means that changing
the color of the blog header led to fewer views in April.

8. The Anecdotal Evidence Fallacy

In place of logical evidence, this fallacy substitutes examples from someone's personal experience. Arguments that
rely heavily on anecdotal evidence tend to overlook the fact that one (possibly isolated) example can't stand alone as
definitive proof of a greater premise.

Example:

One of our clients doubled their conversions after changing all their landing page text to bright red. Therefore, changing
all text to red is a proven way to double conversions.

9. The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

This fallacy gets its colorful name from an anecdote about a Texan who fires his gun at a barn wall, and then proceeds
to paint a target around the closest cluster of bullet holes. He then points at the bullet-riddled target as evidence of
his expert marksmanship.

Speakers who rely on the Texas sharpshooter fallacy tend to cherry-pick data clusters based on a predetermined
conclusion. Instead of letting a full spectrum of evidence lead them to a logical conclusion, they find patterns and
correlations in support of their goals, and ignore evidence that contradicts them or suggests the clusters weren't
actually statistically significant.

Example:

Lisa sold her first startup to an influential tech company, so she must be a successful entrepreneur. (She ignores the
fact that four of her startups have failed since then.)

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
10. The Middle Ground Fallacy

This fallacy assumes that a compromise between two extreme conflicting points is always true. Arguments of this style
ignore the possibility that one or both of the extremes could be completely true or false — rendering any form of
compromise between the two invalids as well.

Example:

Lola thinks the best way to improve conversions is to redesign the entire company website, but John is firmly against
making any changes to the website. Therefore, the best approach is to redesign some portions of the website.

11. The Burden of Proof Fallacy

If a person claims that X is true, it is their responsibility to provide evidence in support of that assertion. It is invalid to
claim that X is true until someone else can prove that X is not true. Similarly, it is also invalid to claim that X is true
because it's impossible to prove that X is false.

In other words, just because there is no evidence presented against something, that doesn't automatically make that
thing true.

Example:

Barbara believes the marketing agency's office is haunted, since no one has ever proven that it isn't haunted.

12. The Personal Incredulity Fallacy

If you have difficulty understanding how or why something is true, that doesn't automatically mean the thing in
question is false. A personal or collective lack of understanding isn't enough to render a claim invalid.

Example:

I don't understand how redesigning our website resulted in more conversions, so there must have been another factor
at play.

13. The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy

Often used to protect assertions that rely on universal generalizations (like "all Marketers love pie") this fallacy
inaccurately deflects counterexamples to a claim by changing the positioning or conditions of the original claim to
exclude the counterexample.

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
In other words, instead of acknowledging that a counterexample to their original claim exists, the speaker amends the
terms of the claim. In the example below, when Barabara presents a valid counterexample to John's claim, John
changes the terms of his claim to exclude Barbara's counterexample.

Example:

John: No marketer would ever put two call-to-actions on a single landing page.
Barbara: Lola, a marketer, actually found great success putting two call-to-actions on a single landing page for our last
campaign.
John: Well, no true marketer would put two call-to-actions on a single landing page, so Lola must not be a true
marketer.

14. The Ad Hominem Fallacy

An ad hominem fallacy occurs when you attack someone personally rather than using logic to refute their argument.
Instead they’ll attack physical appearance, personal traits, or other irrelevant characteristics to criticize the other’s
point of view. These attacks can also be leveled at institutions or groups.

Example:

Barbara: We should review these data sets again just to be sure they’re accurate.
Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
REGION XI – DAVAO
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF PANABO CITY
PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
BRGY. NEW VISAYAS, PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE
Tim: I figured you would suggest that since you’re a bit slow when it comes to math.

15. The Tu Quoque Fallacy

The tu quoque fallacy (Latin for "you also") is an invalid attempt to discredit an opponent by answering criticism with
criticism — but never actually presenting a counterargument to the original disputed claim.
In the example below, Lola makes a claim. Instead of presenting evidence against Lola's claim, John levels a claim
against Lola. This attack doesn't actually help John succeed in proving Lola wrong, since he doesn't address her original
claim in any capacity.

Example:

Lola: I don't think John would be a good fit to manage this project, because he doesn't have a lot of experience with
project management.
John: But you don't have a lot of experience in project management either!

16. The Fallacy Fallacy

Here's something vital to keep in mind when sniffing out fallacies: just because someone's argument relies on a fallacy
doesn't necessarily mean that their claim is inherently untrue.
Making a fallacy-riddled claim doesn't automatically invalidate the premise of the argument — it just means the
argument doesn't actually validate their premise. In other words, their argument sucks, but they aren't necessarily
wrong.

Example:

John's argument in favor of redesigning the company website clearly relied heavily on cherry-picked statistics in support
of his claim, so Lola decided that redesigning the website must not be a good decision.

Recognize Logical Fallacies

Recognizing logical fallacies when they occur and learning how to combat them will prove useful for navigating
disputes in both personal and professional settings. We hope the guide above will help you avoid some of the most
common argument pitfalls and utilize logic instead.

References:

https://www.dav.com.au/resources/itd_speaker_roles.php#:~:text=Each%20speaker%20speaks%20once%20for,fee
dback%20and%20award%20the%20win.

Hesterberg, K. (2022, July 26). 16 Common Logical Fallacies and How to Spot Them.
https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/common-logical-fallacies

Enclosure No. 2 DepED Memorandum No. 043, s. 2020

PANABO CITY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Brgy. New Visayas, Panabo City, Davao del Norte
[email protected]
#OneSchoolOneGoalPCSHSHomeofExcellence