Competing interps - Blake Debate File Title Page 1 of 1 VBI 2009 COMPETING INTERPS GOOD A Interpretation The judge must evaluate theory through a

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Blake Debate File Title VBI 2009 Page 1 of 1 COMPETING INTERPS GOOD (__) A. Interpretation – The judge must evaluate theory through a competing interpretations framework B. Standards _____ It's not what you do it's what you justify – Theory is a question of determining the best set of rules for debate. Any other framework fails to take this into account. _____ Reasonability is arbitrary – There's no brightline for what's "reasonable" making it a cry for judge intervention. AND, I don't think they're reasonable – shows how dumb reasonability is. _____ Reasonability is a race to the bottom - by setting a threshold for what's acceptable aff ground, affs will be incentivised to pick interpretations of the topic closest to that threshold since there's no threat of them losing to theory _____ Reasonability forces unstrategic decisionmaking – It forces debaters to run arguments/positions that don't link in order to prove why they aren't reasonable. Competing interps allows debaters to use potential abuse allowing them to check back abuse strategies
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 09/21/2011 for the course ECONOMICS 302 taught by Professor Wayne during the Spring '11 term at Wayne State University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online