Competing Interps & Reasonability

Competing Interps & Reasonability - Reasonability 1 Not...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Competing interps vs. Reasonability Competing interps: creates negative precedence. E.g. Drop the debater not the arg. 1) Reasonability encourages judge intervention – takes debate out of debaters’ hands 2) Not what you do; it’s what you justify. Send a signal by debating substantive debates in the future 3) Deterrence: prevents abusive strats. In the future
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Reasonability: 1) Not predictable 2) Absurd conclusions – unreasonably narrow ground 3) Advantages neg – aff needs leeway b/c it’s predicated on interp. Also compensates for time skew. (1AR - essential that you make args. For reasonability) NEG ANS: reasonability counters RVI...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/09/2011 for the course HIST 101 taught by Professor Trelawney during the Spring '10 term at Colby-Sawyer.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online