homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:28 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




Forum locked  This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:59 pm
Posts: 349
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: In my room, reading books
Okay, I know I need to know debate theory better. But what/when/how/why should you use these arguments. I have hardly any clue what these mean.

_________________
OIW (Obama Isn't Working): http://obamaisntworking.com/splash/stop-the-spending/

Is the private sector doing "fine"? Check this out: http://obamaisntworking.com/videos/


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:55 pm 
Offline
Ok, maybe not the ONLY homeschooler.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:44 pm
Posts: 4047
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: The Zone of Danger
Not against JVA. Yes against MSSIS.

_________________
Taxes and regulations may restrict my freedom of choice, but words will never coerce me.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:59 pm
Posts: 349
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: In my room, reading books
thehomeschooler wrote:
Not against JVA. Yes against MSSIS.


It's hard for me to know when to run these arguments, because I have hardly any clue what these 2 words even mean in debate terms.

_________________
OIW (Obama Isn't Working): http://obamaisntworking.com/splash/stop-the-spending/

Is the private sector doing "fine"? Check this out: http://obamaisntworking.com/videos/


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:11 pm 
Offline
Avatar Queen
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:56 pm
Posts: 4374
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: here.
In a lot of cases- you're just asking for numbers. Or any kind of quantity.
(in relation to their harms, solvency, etc...)

_________________
Hold on to the things that keep you young
Nothing lasts forever, gone is gone


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 3:15 am
Posts: 222
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Grove City College
thehomeschooler wrote:
Not against JVA. Yes against MSSIS.

Hm. Say what?

K, example of quantification in a round:
Aff says: "babies are laundered in Russia."
You ask: "How many babies are laundered in Russia?"
Aff: "We don't know…"

The you basically say they're not fulfilling their burden of proof that baby laundering is a problem. Because if only three babies laundered, then the policy is insignificant and is outweighed by disavantages. That kind of thing.

_________________
- Reagan Alumni || Formerly: Region IX; Vector;

[[And I know I'll be okay \ Though my skies are turning gray]]

[[Don't want to be perfect, just alright]]


My photoblog


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:29 am
Posts: 553
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: $HOME (Arizona)
Some people argue that if the harms aren't quantifiable -- meaning that you can't put down straight numbers -- they should hardly be counted. (Usually because it's difficult to weigh them against the DAs -- get's framed as "possible, vague Advs." vs. "sure, tangible DAs"). It's a common argument against things like constitutional violations or moral arguments. It goes something like, "Yeah, the constitution is important, but we already violate it. How much will this plan help? If this plan could end all constitutional violations, then, yeah, pass it, but we don't really know how much this will help. You shouldn't vote for a plan unless you know exactly what it's going to do." There are many possible variations on it, though.

_________________
~Philip Monk

Parental Rights!


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 9:20 pm
Posts: 636
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: NH, Reg10n
Couple things about this:

1. Think before you act: mindless demands for numbers and quantification is not what you want to do. Quantification should only be run if you do it intelligently and not as a "last resort" argument.
2. Run it fair: don't be annoying and "ask" for statistics and numbers to soak up the time of the Affirmative team. If you ask for statistics in the 1NR I will be very annoyed. You had almost half an hour to ask for that, and you waited until right before the 1AR?
3. No Hypocrisy: If you ask for numbers on advantages, you better have really solid numbers for your DA's.
4. No "Quantifiable Net-Benefits" Criterion: it is lame. really. It's an excuse for not having anything good to run. And 90% of the time it backfires on you.
5. Be real world: only ask for quantification on an advantage if I could be reasonably asked in a normal debate. Asking for how many troops we save in Afghanistan because we have better relations with Russia is silly.
6. Make it Big: if you just make an off hand remark on one of your subpoints, "Oh yeah, they didn't quantify this... moving on to my 8th meaningless subpoint response..." you will annoy Affirmatives very much for not a good reason. If you run it, go all the way. Chances are, if you are throwing that argument on to the Aff with an off hand approach, it's just a time sucker.
7. Not a question: you should make your argument just that. An argument. Not a question. Argue that there aren't any statistics, don't "ask" for statistics.


Personally, "quantification" arguments tend to be cheap ways of arguing something when you don't have anything to run. I'm not saying that they are illegitimate in all circumstances, but only argue quantification when it is a legitimate time to run it.

Edit: shouldn't this be in strategy?

_________________
Mrs. A wrote:
Oh my.... another Edelblut?

edelblutmusic <my music you listen to with your ears


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:21 am 
Offline
Doesn't have a title.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:47 pm
Posts: 2955
Home Schooled: Yes
chaching wrote:
I have hardly any clue what these mean.
The quantifiability of a given argument with respect to a given impact is the certainty with which the quantity of the impact can be estimated. For example, a disadvantage with an impact of $1.1-1.2 million lost is more quantifiable than a disadvantage with an impact of $10-100 million.

With respect to some impacts, quantification is meaningless. These are usually a priori ethical impacts. It makes no sense even to try to quantify them, yet they can still outweigh theoretically infinite quantifiable impacts due their ethical priority.

_________________
Jordan Bakke


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:59 pm
Posts: 349
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: In my room, reading books
So what makes MSSIS unquantifiable?

_________________
OIW (Obama Isn't Working): http://obamaisntworking.com/splash/stop-the-spending/

Is the private sector doing "fine"? Check this out: http://obamaisntworking.com/videos/


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:19 pm 
Offline
Ok, maybe not the ONLY homeschooler.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:44 pm
Posts: 4047
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: The Zone of Danger
^Assuming Russia doesn't accept (the most likely scenario), the advantages of simply asking them to join are unquantifiable. What's more, we don't know if the net impact will be positive or negative. In those cases, the benefit of the doubt should go neg.

_________________
Taxes and regulations may restrict my freedom of choice, but words will never coerce me.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:16 am
Posts: 170
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Either "I can see Russia from my house" or "::stealing Jacob Dean's location::"
mechanical pencil wrote:
2. Run it fair: don't be annoying and "ask" for statistics and numbers to soak up the time of the Affirmative team. If you ask for statistics in the 1NR I will be very annoyed. You had almost half an hour to ask for that, and you waited until right before the 1AR?
Yeah, bring it up as early as possible. Don't spend your last speech raising points about 20 numbers you want the AFF to provide. You look to the judge like you've lost every other issue, and you leave the other team thinking, "Come on, if they really wanted to know that, they could have asked 3 speeches ago." We had someone do that to us once with Vagueness/Quantification, and I was sitting there thinking, "Come on :roll: , why now?" Bringing up quantification arguments early makes the judge perceive the argument as less petty.
mechanical pencil wrote:
Personally, "quantification" arguments tend to be cheap ways of arguing something when you don't have anything to run. I'm not saying that they are illegitimate in all circumstances, but only argue quantification when it is a legitimate time to run it.
Which is why Preston said don't run it against JVA.

Edit: 150th Post

_________________
Quote:
Why is irresponsibility automatically a bad thing?

Say wha...? Must I answer?


"The nine most feared words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.'" (Ronald Reagan)

Quote:
Insert random statement useful for nothing but narcissism


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked  This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited