{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

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
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 counts as fair/educational debate. 1) the standard itself – strat skew, ground,
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}