Most theory debates come down to. away in your files. substantial in relation to current fireworks policy. The real debate isn't about substantially but. How Affirmatives Can Win on Theory. Posted June 3rd, 2012 by admin. 39 Comments. Misael Gonzalez – Trinity University, UTNIF I’m going to start with a story. Will MalsonLD Theory File Page 1 of 15 LD Theory File Index LD. job of the judge to evaluate who better argues the policy issues in a debate. Files. Theory.
Policy debate is an activity in which high-school and college students deal with issues that are irrelevant, improbable, or idiotic in a hyper-rigorous. Not only do disputes over debate theory increasingly focus. the present system in a policy debate is presumed. rather than rummaging through files or.
THE DEBATE BIBLETHE DEBATE BIBLEBy Jon Bruschke. I. INTRODUCTIONII. The book of TECHIII. The book of DISADSIV.
The book of COUNTERPLANSV. The book of TOPICALITYVI. The book of THE CRITIQUEVII. The book of OTHER THEORY ISSUESVIII. The book of DEMEANOR AND. PARTNER INTERACTIONIX.
- Theory File 1 THEORY INDEX. There are many agencies within the US that enact space policy Sadah 2011 (Eligar Sadah. debate. It also forces.
- Debate Theory File - Free download as Word Doc (.doc /.docx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free.
- Chapter 13. Advanced Theory. What do you mean, advanced theory? Don’t we have enough theory already? Debate theory is an ongoing process. Each generation sees.
- This page is intended to serve as a handy reference for current theory in NPDA and CEDA-style parliamentary debate. It will hopefully be useful to both beginners and.
The book of BIG THEORY ISSUES FOR BIG DEBATESX. The book of TIPS FOR INCOMING FRESHMANWHAT THESE 3. PAGES WILL DO FOR YOUA lot of debates are lost by beginning debaters because they don't know how to handle. They might not answer a T argument correctly, they.
DA, the mention of the word "Critique" will give. These 3. 0 pages will get you up to speed on all the. The hard ones to judge are the ones where.
This packet. will not allow you to walk in and beat the top team in the country; it will allow you to. THE BIG PICTURETo succeed in debate, you need six things: Tech, cards, and theory about disads, the.
THEORY DEBATES: STRATEGY NOTESDebating theory is tough. Almost all debaters are more comfortable collapsing to issues. You. need to decide how "high risk" a debater you are. You may have a better team. I think this may be a mistake; debate history has.
Getting back to cards will often. In the rounds you need to figure out whether you can win a theory. You can win a theory argument provided that you GO. WIN the. argument. Some judges won't vote on what they perceive as a non- argument no matter what. The flip side is that other good debate minds have concluded that if you are an upstart. I think that if you are WINNING your.
But don't be afraid to press the issue. THE TRUTH ABOUT WHININGMost theory debates come down to whether something is fair or unfair; in fact, ALL.
Often, one side will say something is unfair and the. Here is how 9. 9% of your. If the side alleging an unfairness can convince the judge.
REALLY IS unfair and that is makes a. If they can't do that, they are whining.
To win a. theory issue, you have to invest some time in the debate explaining in some detail why. Potential abuse" arguments are treacherous; if that's the best you got by. Your best bet, in. Finally, say that the very strategy of leaving open the possibility is unfair because you. ATTITUDEThe most important thing for you to know is this: You will never be a nationally.
That means more than just finishing our evidence assignments. This. means: (a) Going over old flows, finding out what went wrong, and then correcting them. Of all of those, (c) is the most important. On every single topic there are a few. I can promise you will be heard in over 7. On the. criminal procedure topic it was Clinton, on Prez. Powers it was the executive order.
Southeast asia it was China. If you. can make sure that you have mastered that ONE argument, blocked out every possible answer. Ideally, your coaches.
This means the following: Being able to flow everything they say; being able to speak. At its highest level of. Keep in mind that good tech means reading cards so clearly that they sound like your. If the cards or the explanation give after theory arguments are unclear you have. Also, debates are won and lost on the basis of arguments and not taglines. If you are. struggling with an issue and are simply concerned that you don't have enough answers stop.
You rock if: You can flow everything they say, know all the right answers to make. A or 1. N. and speak quickly and clearly. You can survive if: You can flow and be able to fill your speech time without. The only way to get the tech you need is with tons of practice; at a minimum you should. Of all the skills, flowing.
To get to varsity level quickly, flow one debate a day. The. key flowing is abbreviating; make sure that you have an abbreviation for every phrase that.
It doesn't matter what your abbreviation is as long as it can be written. CARDSThere are two reasons you need lots of cards: (a) so you will never get in a debate. If, for example, you have no idea what Critical Legal. Studies is, you will never figure it out when they read it during the debate, even if you. The best way for you to get an understanding of the issues is to do all the original. However, because of the sheer volume of research there is to be done. If you get an assignment from.
Ideally, you should take a highlighter and. This is time intensive, but if you get. Here is one final thought: At the 1. NDT I judged 4 elimination rounds plus the top. In every single. debate the negative went for the strategy of turning the case and in every single debate. That means that from about round 7 of the. NDT on, the only way for the negative to win a debate is to turn the case.
To do that you. have to know the affirmative articles as well as they do PLUS have negative evidence. During the course of the year, therefore, you should at least have every. You rock if: Every card in your file has been highlighted, all of your own evidence. You can survive if you can: Find every file in your box; know all the evidence.
Background and basic terms. The affirmative runs a plan and from it they claim advantages. The. importance of an advantage is based on its impact, also called significance or. The impact can be a rights violation, the loss of freedom, suffering (1.
At the end of the round the judge (and the rebuttalists, if they are. The affirmative must prove that their plan is not being done now; that is called inherency. From there they must prove that there is a big problem (harms, significance, or impact.
To win a disadvantage, the negative must prove that the plan will do something bad (the. The initial link is what the plan. A threshold is the point at which the impact occurs; if we are close to the. If we are far from the.
The. threshold is often called the brink, and phrases like "now is a key time". The tagline "no threshold" usually means that. Both affirmative advantages and negative disadvantages must be unique. It is the. single most important bit of debate jargon to know. Uniqueness refers to the amount of the. For example, the affirmative might claim to reduce prison overpopulation and reduce.
As significance, they might claim that 1 million Americans will get TB a. The unique advantage, however, is not 1 million people, because some people who. TB and some people who are in uncrowded prisons will get. TB anyway. The affirmative can only claim as its advantage that number of people that. TB. The negative has the same burden with its impact. The negative might claim that the.
President to be more popular and that if the President is more popular he. However, the affirmative would point out that. President might be popular anyway and that there is already a chance the health care. The negative can only claim as its disadvantage the unique increase in. On the aff. Once you get to round 7 of the NDT and later, you had better have some cards on a. However, there are many, many occasions where. Trust me when I say that a few intelligent presses can be devastating to a bad argument.
If the argument sucks making the right presses is much better than reading a bunch of. Each step of the disad must have its own uniqueness and threshold. Imagine the. following disad: (a) The plan is popular, (b) the President will get credit for the plan's. President will kill the Non- Proliferation Treaty, (d) NPT is. Notice that (a) is the initial link.
Notice that the negative has to prove 3. President's popularity is on the brink (otherwise a rise or drop in. President's ability to. NPT is on the brink (otherwise the President's efforts to kill. Keeping this, in mind, you.
For every step from the first internal link to the impact you should make both. In the above example, you. In the 1. AR you should look at the evidence the negative has read and use it against.
This can take one of two forms: "The uniqueness swamps the link" - - If you have argued, for example, that the. President is unpopular, and they read a bunch of cards. President is popular, then you should say that if the President is so.
The threshold is too low" - - If, for example, you have claimed that there is. President is too popular now and the negative says that the. President is unpopular, you should respond by saying that if the President is so unpopular. Point out things in the past that would trigger the initial link or any internal. In the present example, you would have 4 arguments (in addition.
Here. are the examples: -- "Non- unique, the President let gays in the military, and that was an unpopular. Non- unique, the President has already come out against the NPT; he gave a. Friday saying he will oppose it"- - "Non- unique, the NPT is already failing. North Korea decided not to comply with. Non- unique, countries are already proliferation now; Israel and Japan are. The more recent the example you use the better; anything that occurs before their brink. Anything that happened after their brink card should have triggered the link and already.
You don't necessarily need evidence to make these arguments, but it certainly helps. In the 1. AR, all of these arguments should be transformed into "empirically.
If, for example, the brink card is from January of 1. February of 1. 99. President let gays in the military, the disad should. If it hasn't, that proves that the link is empirically untrue.** Point out things other than the affirmative that will occur in the future that. There might be an ethics hearing on the President, for example. President's popularity whether or not the plan is passed.
Thus, even if. the link, brink, and impact are true voting against the affirmative won't prevent the. You can make as many of these as you can think of or have evidence. At this point, we have 9 arguments against the disad.
Notice that, for each internal link, you can make 3 different types of uniqueness. Read the initial link cards carefully (you should always, always, always call for.
In the present example, argue that what the link card says will reduce popularity isn't. If the link says that "liberal actions are unpopular," say.
Remember that it is their burden to prove their own. Make sure that the impact cards are talking about what the link cards are saying.