T. NAKAGAWA ET AL.
skills, and the enhancement of a candidate’s writing ability to
embody their high quality dissertation. Those are also essential
skills for distinct groups of people in any society. In no way is
the assessment of the work of a proponent’s research consid-
ered proper to th is subject.
A proponent will never be considered proper without com-
pleting this subject. Indeed, a proponent must meet his obliga-
tion in disputation before her/his thesis is completed. Neverthe-
less, it is normally expected in the disputation unit that the the-
sis selected freely and proposed by a proponent will have
originated from her/his interest in her/his research. Selection
based on familiarity enables the proponent to find a thesis with
an immediate and broader scope. The proponent has to under-
stand that the thesis will be considered nothing but a proposi-
tion laid down and stated as a theme to be discussed, proved
and maintained against attack. It is in this basic argumentative
context that practice in disputation is offered.
The proponent is required to demonstrate a satisfactory level
of disputative skills in the disputation, so that it is necessary to
describe the contents in detail and to inform not only the audi-
ence but also disputants who challenge the efforts of the propo-
nent and assessors, those who judge his performance, too. The
proponent is therein advised that she/he is expected to display
several competencies and to demonstrate them at an adequate
level. Firstly, he needs a competency in devising an appropriate
thesis; secondly, that in formulating an argument in defense of
that thesis; then, that in presenting that argument publicly; and
finally, that in engaging herself/himself in dispute over the ar-
gument.
Particularly important with regard to the thesis is that it must
be unambiguous, precise, self-consistent and grammatical in its
statement. In its quality, it must not be self-evident, shallow; or
trivial. It must also be novel in that, if sustained, it is a state-
ment of a truth previously unstated or unproven.
As to the argument, it should have logical strength and, pref-
erably, validity. Especially, its premises must be identifiable and
defined; its logical development must be both evident and
sound; as a whole it must support or sustain the thesis.
Both written and oral skills in presentation of the thesis and
its supporting argument are required. The proponent must show
sensitivity to prevailing rule as well as professional competence.
In a written demonstration called the prospectus, a logical evo-
lution is demanded concretely showing an appropriate balance
of materials, and adequate syntax, distinct precision, correct
spelling and style.
In an oral demonstration, called the discourse, both the tech-
nique of delivery and the arrangement of content have to be of
high standard. The delivery includes questions of syntax, clarity,
and repertoire; those of mannerisms, behavior and timing, those
of choice of aids in terms of which is to be wise and those of
their use of the aids in terms of which is to be clever. With re-
spect to the content, the material presented has to be judged in
terms of whether they have been well exposed, appropriate to
the audience, and I proper balance. Competence is also expect-
ed in the introduction of new ideas, and in the description of
new concepts or of unorthodox views, utilizing relevant re-
course to illustrative examples, suggestions, or analogies. The
oral and written demonstrations, moreover, are to be comple-
mentary or mutu ally reinforci n g.
Finally, there are the actual skills of verbal battle, in disputa-
tion. A proponent having these skills well developed will show
ready comprehension of questions put, perception of the intent
and scope of a disputant’s counter argument, and an aptitude to
remain relevant and to the point. These skills include also abil-
ity in the legitimate use of such techniques as deflection, coun-
ter-attack and obscureness; and should disclose the proponent’s
authority and knowledge in her/his selected area.
In order to allow a display of all of these skills, as well as an
assessment of them, a disputation session is scheduled; a panel
of disputants, charged with the main burden of disputation, is
appointed; and a panel of assessors is arranged. The panel of
disputants prepares itself before the event by studying the pro-
spectus, the written summary of the proponent’s argument. The
judgment of the panel of assessors is based on the main facets
of disputation listed above.
The Procedure
The formal business of the disputation begins with issuing of
the prospectus, the written summary of the thesis and proposed
argument; this document is limited to five pages including fig-
ures and tables, and become available about one week before
the verbal presentation. It carries a face sheet which sets out, as
well as the name of the proponent and her/his thesis, the other
people involved and in particular the panel of disputants. Its
purpose is both to catch the interest of potential auditors and to
display to anybody interested in engaging in dispute the main
premises and argument to be used.
Before the disputation session the appointed panel of dispu-
tants (of several persons, normally four persons) meets and, on
the basis of the prospectus, studies the argument and prepares
an attack. Often a single meeting suffices, but sometimes the
panel feels obliged to consult references, or the argument af-
fords several lines of attack and a single meeting does not suf-
fice to explore all of these. Well prepared panels provide for
themselves several independent points with which to challenge
the proponent’s argument. When the attack on a particular point
is lengthened in time, the successive steps will have usually
been divided between the members of the panel who will then
determine for themselves an order of attack.
The proceedings are conducted in a quite formal manner by a
moderator, who has an impartial role to play throughout the
disputation. At the beginning of the session, she/he introduces
the proponent, announcing such degrees and other academic
distinction.
After reminding all that forty-five minutes or less are al-
lowed in which to present the argument, the moderator then
invites the proponent to speak to this thesis. During the dis-
course interruptions are not permitted.
At the end of the discourse, however, the moderator declares
a brief pause. This has several purposes, aside from allowing
coffee to be served. It is an interval of relief for the proponent;
it is an opportunity for the audience at large to reflect and ex-
change views on the material offered; most importantly it per-
mits the panel of disputants to re-arrange their argument, if
necessary, to account for the added material made available in
the spoken presentation, or discourse. It is indeed realized that
without this opportunity the panel of disputants is frequently
capable of only a superficial and formal attack based on the
written text and one which tends to ignore new material made
available in the oral version. The pause lasts about ten minutes.
Upon reassembling, the members of the panel press their points
for about thirty minutes, and when they have done, the mod-
erator invites other auditors to dispute. The auditors include the
Copyright © 2013 SciRe s .
498