Jump to content
Eric_W.

Question about what something means? Ask here!

Recommended Posts

What exactly is an impact turn?

 

it's an argument where you say the opposite of X impact is true. ie, the 1NC reads a cap & trade disad with a warming impact. the 2AC would impact turn that by saying global warming is good, because it prevents an ice age which is a comparatively bigger impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What exactly is an impact turn?

 

The above posy is right, simply put it is say ing that their impact is a good thing instead of a bad thing. The warming scenario is a good example of this (i.e. warming = more bikinis or something like that) but most "impact turns" you will see are not truly and fully impact turns but are actually more along the lines of an internal link turn. This is not saying global warming good but cap and trade is bad (i.e. Cap and Trade kills the economy). But for all purposes its functionally the same concept and both are just considered impact turns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok tell me if i have this right. when i have disads that benifet with my counterplan they are now called net benifets right?

and if so how would i run this?

do i still say the DA without the uniqueness and then the CP?

ex.DA

DA

CP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. And also, could someone please tell me what warrants means?

 

It is the reason why your claim or argument is true. It can come in many forms, like statistics, a logical induction or deduction, an empirical example, or even an author's credentials (I don't recommend that being your only warrant)

 

ok tell me if i have this right. when i have disads that benifet with my counterplan they are now called net benifets right?

and if so how would i run this?

do i still say the DA without the uniqueness and then the CP?

ex.DA

DA

CP

 

Depends what you mean. If you have a disad that links to the Aff and not the CP, then yes, its called a net benefit because it shows why your cp is net beneficial over the aff. You run the disad the exact same, uniqueness and all. Its just that if your CP doesn't link than thats a reason why CP does something better than the plan, just read your disad and then your CP w/ text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is the reason why your claim or argument is true. It can come in many forms, like statistics, a logical induction or deduction, an empirical example, or even an author's credentials (I don't recommend that being your only warrant)

 

 

 

Depends what you mean. If you have a disad that links to the Aff and not the CP, then yes, its called a net benefit because it shows why your cp is net beneficial over the aff. You run the disad the exact same, uniqueness and all. Its just that if your CP doesn't link than thats a reason why CP does something better than the plan, just read your disad and then your CP w/ text.

 

but why does it need uniqueness if im trying to say the CP will solve and not the status quo

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are Impact turns:

 

Spending Disad example:

A. Uniqueness: econ good now/no spending now

B. Link-you cause off budget spending

C. Impact (also called internal link) -$pending = Economy downturn

D. Impact-Economic downturn = war

 

Link turn vs. Impact turn:

A link turn would be we save money. ("we save the economy" is a second type of link turn)

 

An impact turn would be economic decline good or war good.

 

 

Impact turns are most commonly used versus:

 

a) politics scenarios

B) economy

c) hegemony

d) federalism

e) sometimes democracy

but other impacts too.

 

In other news: Warrants:

 

Thanks. And also, could someone please tell me what warrants means?
Reasons. Answers to the question "why?" Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's an irony aff?

 

I really have never heard of it, its seems like a critical aff, which is an aff that is structured kind of like a kritik...it may have an in round impact or a dehumanization one...I really dont like them and I personally think that they create messy rounds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really have never heard of it, its seems like a critical aff, which is an aff that is structured kind of like a kritik...it may have an in round impact or a dehumanization one...I really dont like them and I personally think that they create messy rounds

 

You haven't heard of it but you don't like them? Sounds legit.

 

Anyways, an irony aff advocates a plan/concept ironically and then says that advocating X concept ironically is a way to dismantle it. I've seen it used most often with capitalism.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You haven't heard of it but you don't like them? Sounds legit.

 

Anyways, an irony aff advocates a plan/concept ironically and then says that advocating X concept ironically is a way to dismantle it. I've seen it used most often with capitalism.

He doesn't know what he is talking about.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

Says the one who advocates perming a case turn and thinks that all SPEC arguments are legit.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's a solvency deficit?

"Doesn't solve as well".

This is a term that comes up when there is a counterplan, or sometimes a kritik alternative, being compared to the plan. The aff will argue that the CP/alt is unable to solve some of the advantages, or that the CP/alt solves some of the advantages less effectively than the plan does. The aff solves more, thus there is a solvency deficit between the CP and the plan.

Sometimes the neg will have really awesome, specific solvency evidence, and claim to solve the 1ac advantages better (arguing a solvency deficit of the plan to the CP); sometimes the neg will compare the CP/alt to an aff permutation, and argue that the perm has a solvency deficit for the net benefit of the CP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks so much.

 

Also, (and be warned, this is a pretty stupid question coming up) what's framework? Is it the same thing as a theory argument?

 

Framework is something that I only grasped this year (because we read it in our aff). Not a stupid question at all. Framework is simply a certain way the judge should evaluate the round. For example, if you read utilitarian framework, you would be asking the judge to evaluate the round on who saves more people, the aff or neg. If somebody reads that against you, you can either agree (not the best thing) or read value to life good. The opposite is also true. You could ask the judge to reject util and evaluate who keeps the highest value to life in the world post-plan (or kritik). You could respond to that with util. It can get MUCH more specific than that (evaluate patriarchy first!?) but those are the 2 main ones. A good kritik usually includes framework, and kritikal/slightly kritikal affs usually do too. If the opposing team drops your framework, the judge is forced to evaluate the round in that framework. Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fiat is the theoretical assumption that the affirmative plan will be enacted. The idea of fiat is to remove political considerations from debate to determine whether an action should be undertaken without consideration of whether it could ever pass through congress.

 

so if aff did a fiat, that would mean that they are saying "we don't care of whether or not Congress could pass it or not, our plan would be beneficial"

would neg ever fiat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so if aff did a fiat, that would mean that they are saying "we don't care of whether or not Congress could pass it or not, our plan would be beneficial"

would neg ever fiat?

The aff always fiats their plan, it's not a choice. Also, neg can have fiat, but there's cards on why neg fiat is bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The aff always fiats their plan, it's not a choice. Also, neg can have fiat, but there's cards on why neg fiat is bad.

 

right, so what would the neg fiat and why would aff say neg fiat is bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The neg would fiat their counterplan. For instance if the neg's cp was 50 states, they would fiat that all 50 states pass the bill universally.

 

Aff, because they want to win, would argue that it's unrealistic, limits education by creating unreal scenarios, etc.

 

ohhh that makes sense. thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is inherency?

This is basically where it said that plan doesn't exist in the status quo and won't happen in the status quo. It's a standard, and if the plan is non-inherent, since the neg gets jurisdiction of the status quo, the neg wins the round (unless you win that non-inherency is good or something like that).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is basically where it said that plan doesn't exist in the status quo and won't happen in the status quo.
Nope, sorry. Try again...
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...