homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:13 am
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Parametrics
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 203
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region II Oregon
I was just wondering what you guys all felt about Parametrics theory and whether it would be a good idea to use, or if you should stick to non-topical cp's? Any thoughts?

_________________
I am ninja!
Best/Tähtinen|Rainmakers|2010-2011
Mckenzie/Tähtinen|Rainmakers|2011-2012
Miu/Tahtinen|Rainmakers|2012-2013


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:01 am 
Offline
titles are too mainstream.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:59 pm
Posts: 4579
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Wisconsin
there are good arguments for both sides. i would only recommend running a topical CP if you are prepared to debate the legitimacy of it (or perhaps prepared to deal with judges who vote against you just because you ran one :P)

i don't really have an opinion on the issue, but if someone ran a T CP against me i probably wouldn't argue parametrics, simply because it makes for a confusing round.

_________________
Somehow Your blood makes You blind
To our divide
I am all Yours

David Roth wrote:
you make my life hell.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:19 pm
Posts: 1070
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: NC
i was wondering when parametrics would get its own thread, seeing as it's at least mentioned in half the theory threads already. :P

i don't have a strong opinion on it, but i feel like it's a lot harder to argue parametrics than it is to argue against it (i.e. it's harder to justify a topical CP than it is to knock it down). so i would never run a topical CP on NEG and i would argue against a topical CP if i was AFF.

in terms of arguments, it makes sense to say that AFF means affirmative side of rez and NEG means negative side of rez. so thus a CP that affirms the resolution is just another reason to vote AFF. but it also makes sense to say that AFF means the affirmative side of the case and NEG means negative side of the case. and then as long as the CP isn't the case it's legit. IMO the rez-centric interpretation is more intuitive than the case-centric one, which is why i think it's easier to argue.

the reason why i'm not personally committed to either side is that i haven't really seen any warrants from either side regarding why i should believe their side. in other words, to the parametrics people: why should i prefer a case-centric interp over a rez-centric one? and to the non-parametrics folk: why should i prefer a rez-centric interp over a case-centric one?

_________________
- Will

2010-11 | Freshman | Bardsley/King | IX | 13th at Regionals
2011-12 | Sophomore | Dovel/King | IX | Q'd to Nationals
2012-13 | Junior | Dovel/King | IX | 17th at Nationals
2013-14 | Senior | Dovel/King | IX | 5th at Nationals

Baylor University class of 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:44 am 
Offline
Cupcake
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:08 pm
Posts: 1211
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Illinois
Honestly, a lot of the debate (about T CPs) comes down to what you believe is being voted for:

1. The resolution (which justifies things like AJACs, arguing against T CPs on aff, and whole res)

2. The resolution exclusively via the aff plan (which arguably allows for T CPs and would exclude AJACs)

3. The team (which basically means the best speakers and arguers win and the resolution only allows to streamline the debate so that you can actually determine who IS the better arguer)

I hold to number 2 with a bit of number 3. So I don't mind running a T CP.

I wouldn't argue against a CP on aff on the basis of T, but definitely would on the issue of competition and fairness.

_________________
Drew Chambers
LinkedIn


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 203
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region II Oregon
Drew wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the debate (about T CPs) comes down to what you believe is being voted for:

1. The resolution (which justifies things like AJACs, arguing against T CPs on aff, and whole res)

2. The resolution exclusively via the aff plan (which arguably allows for T CPs and would exclude AJACs)


I have been doing debate for two years now, but I have no idea what you mean by AJACs. Could you explain? I probably know the term, but not the acronym.

_________________
I am ninja!
Best/Tähtinen|Rainmakers|2010-2011
Mckenzie/Tähtinen|Rainmakers|2011-2012
Miu/Tahtinen|Rainmakers|2012-2013


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:34 am 
Offline
Cupcake
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:08 pm
Posts: 1211
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Illinois
Highlander wrote:
Drew wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the debate (about T CPs) comes down to what you believe is being voted for:

1. The resolution (which justifies things like AJACs, arguing against T CPs on aff, and whole res)

2. The resolution exclusively via the aff plan (which arguably allows for T CPs and would exclude AJACs)


I have been doing debate for two years now, but I have no idea what you mean by AJACs. Could you explain? I probably know the term, but not the acronym.


Sure, no problem. They aren't very common in NCFCA.

AJAC stands for Alternative Justification Affirmative Case and basically it's a 1AC that presents multiple plans (that might be mechanically conflicting e.g. under the immigration res one plan might open the border and the other might militarize the border) to justify the res. Usually they are run in a way that says only one plan needs to win, so if you run three plans you could lose two, but still win.

_________________
Drew Chambers
LinkedIn


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:19 pm
Posts: 1070
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: NC
Drew wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the debate (about T CPs) comes down to what you believe is being voted for:

1. The resolution (which justifies things like AJACs, arguing against T CPs on aff, and whole res)

2. The resolution exclusively via the aff plan (which arguably allows for T CPs and would exclude AJACs)

3. The team (which basically means the best speakers and arguers win and the resolution only allows to streamline the debate so that you can actually determine who IS the better arguer)

I hold to number 2 with a bit of number 3. So I don't mind running a T CP.

I wouldn't argue against a CP on aff on the basis of T, but definitely would on the issue of competition and fairness.

that's an interesting way of classifying it. why do you hold to #2 instead of #1?

_________________
- Will

2010-11 | Freshman | Bardsley/King | IX | 13th at Regionals
2011-12 | Sophomore | Dovel/King | IX | Q'd to Nationals
2012-13 | Junior | Dovel/King | IX | 17th at Nationals
2013-14 | Senior | Dovel/King | IX | 5th at Nationals

Baylor University class of 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 am 
Offline
Get off my lawn, young'ins!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:06 pm
Posts: 1912
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Frantically hitting Ctrl+Alt+Del
Yay! Time for parametrics thread number 3,234,123!

My basic argument against parametrics: Voting for or against the resolution is neat, simple, and completely explains everything about debate theory. There is no reason to introduce parametrics into this framework; it's just an extra layer of complexity that adds confusion without any corresponding benefit. Therefore, we should stick with the resolution.

The statement "there is no reason" is the main point of contention. Isaiah McPeak and I had an extended debate on this subject some time back, which I strongly recommend reading if you want to understand the issue better:

Original post with my arguments
Isaiah's response #1
My response #1
Isaiah's response #2
My response #2

_________________
Abe bimuí bithúo dousí abe - "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free"

COG 2016 generics-only sourcebook - NCFCA/Stoa (thread)
Factsmith research software - v1.5 currently available (thread)
Loose Nukes debate blog - stuff to read with your eyes.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Parametrics
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 160
Home Schooled: Yes
Drew wrote:
AJAC stands for Alternative Justification Affirmative Case


I would like to take a moment to express my deep hatred for AJAC's >.<

And I also agree with MSD. I feel like there is validity to the theory, but it's not beneficial to the debate round.

_________________
Isaac Franklin

09-10 | Edmonds/Harris | Rainmakers | R3
10-11 | Edmonds/Harris | Rainmakers | R2
11-12 | Aldrich/Harris | Rainmakers | R2
12-13 | Bayliss/Harris | Rainmakers | R2


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited