homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:28 pm
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  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:58 am
Posts: 244
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: do I want you to know...?
I'm writing my topicality presses for this season and I can't find anything in our (albeit small) library of theory books that lists reasons to prefer for use in a topicality press. I know we learned about it in one of our club meetings but I can't find my notes for that meeting either (arrgh). Anybody have a list?

_________________
Jonathan Meckel || Nebraska || NCFCA Boycotter. #BracketGate #BracketLivesMatter
Free at last, they took your life, they could not take your pride


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:24 am 
Offline
Doesn't have a title.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:47 pm
Posts: 2955
Home Schooled: Yes
Maybe you could post examples of interpretations and we could discuss them and come up with reasons to prefer them.

_________________
Jordan Bakke


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:58 am
Posts: 244
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: do I want you to know...?
Okay...

1) Affirmative should debate Laws dealing with Federal Elections
2) Affirmative should debate Federal Laws dealing with Elections

...those two, for a start.

_________________
Jonathan Meckel || Nebraska || NCFCA Boycotter. #BracketGate #BracketLivesMatter
Free at last, they took your life, they could not take your pride


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:49 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
Masked Midnight wrote:
Halogen wrote:
"Without a resolution, affirmative can make arbitrary arguments but the only arguments useful to negative are those that contradict affirmative's arguments. To limit negative, but not affirmative, is imbalanced. If you vote negative on topicality, then the only arguments useful to affirmative are those that negative has a reason beforehand to prepare to contradict. To limit affirmative and negative by the same resolution is balanced. Balance is better than imbalance because debate is, by purpose, an opportunity to compete via educated counterarguments on both sides."
Here's a solid RTP T that Jordan posted earlier. :)
That's an impact to topicality in general, not a reason to prefer a specific interpretation over other interpretations. Which are you looking for, Jonathan?

Most RTPs are really just variations of "Interpretation X allows XYZ ridiculous thing, so prefer Interpretation Y, which doesn't." For example, Russia year, I wrote a t-press that used the brightline of "Russia Must Exist": "if Russia were to vanish from the face of the globe, and you could still implement the plan, then it's not policy towards Russia." The main RTP was that, in the absence of this interpretation, all sorts of crazy things were acceptable. You could nuke China with the intent of influencing Russia's foreign policy, and that was arguably topical. Since that's absurd, the argument went, we should prefer the Russia-must-exist interpretation/brightline.

A converse example might be the guys Environment year arguing that only reforms to NEPA (the National Environmental Policy Act) were topical; we attacked this on similar grounds (it created absurdities), only the absurdity it created was that obviously-environmental things like pollution regulations weren't topical.

You can also have other self-contained RTPs, like "grammatical accuracy". The grammar of the resolution has been discussed in other threads, if you're interested in that. COG has in-depth grammar defenses of both interpretations you listed.

(Also: Hi! I know you! :) )

_________________
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
   
PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 6:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 100
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region V (Manhattan KS)
mountain dude wrote:
Okay...

1) Affirmative should debate Laws dealing with Federal Elections
2) Affirmative should debate Federal Laws dealing with Elections

...those two, for a start.
I think that there are arguments either way, But I side with #2. However, no mater what it is, you should be prepared to defend your case against both definitions unless you have a very strong argument for why it is one instead of the other. Or just pick a case that fits under both so it doesn't matter which one it is (like I did :) )

_________________
Non nobis Domine, Sed nomini Tu o da gloriam


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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