Effects T Bad - Daniel Imas A. Interpretation- The...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Daniel Imas A. Interpretation- The affirmative must be limited to arguing the effects of taking the topic directly, rather than the act of the topic being an effect of another action. B. Violation- They only achieve a topical interpretation of the affirmative plan because of the effects of another action. C. Standards 1. Ground- a. This explodes negative ground because any action could potentially cause another action. For instance, my opponent could argue that nuclear disarmament or making a utopian society could cause the plan to take effect, but that leaves them infinitely many causal link chains to invent. b. This destroys my turn ground because I’m not able to attack any of the general links to the topic to the affirmative makes because they side step them by achieving those links through another action, denying me any link turn ground. c. Ground is key to fairness because it determines the arguments we can make. If one side has a much larger scope of ground than the other that
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
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.

Page1 / 2

Effects T Bad - Daniel Imas A. Interpretation- The...

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