Theory Part 2

Theory Part 2 - Theory Part 2 Why we run theory? Must be...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Theory Part 2 Why we run theory? Must be able to adjust skill sets…don’t conform 1) Checking abuse – running a prioris 2) Determine why one interp is better than another provides a metastandard to competing claim 3) Structure to appeal to judges’ intuitions 4) Strategy- winning rounds Theory is a metastandard that defends/critiques certain aspects of debate Judges are becoming more keen to theory They’re becoming more topic specific – community establishes norms like no 10 a priori cases. a) Interpretation - why we care about the round? No risk args. Are theoretically illegitimate, those which he can win the round and I cannot. You need to define terms. This part is just an outline – no justifications. Write the interpretation out b) Violation – explanation of why the opp. Does something that wrongs you. 1) need to be specific as you can 2) don’t explain why violation is bad c) Standards – measure to what degree or the aim of what is met you’re saying this is what...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/09/2011 for the course US 122 taught by Professor Trelawney during the Spring '10 term at Colby-Sawyer.

Page1 / 3

Theory Part 2 - Theory Part 2 Why we run theory? Must be...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online