Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
L.Knoth

Hypo testing

Recommended Posts

So there's an argument that has been brought to my attn via the KC circuit...

Its called 'hypothesis testing'

I don't know much about it, so i was wondering if anyone could give me a quick run down of what exactly it is, what it means in context of this years resolution, and any theory thta could be used to beat it.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that hypo testing is really theoretical illegitimate or can even be argued that it is. Your best shot is going for a vagueness argument or something of that nature. Hypo testing is pretty much were a team defends the entire resolution. An example of people doing this on any topic would be to read the resolution as there plan text. Also this is far from new in fact this is way old school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHAHA.

 

Hypo-testing (Warrants and Counter-Warrants) was the paradigm before policy-making was used as the basis for evaluation. Its not used. Its easily beatable by arguing that the negative justifies a unreasonable research burden on the aff. The negative will respond (9/10 times [has this even been ran 10 times in the past 10 years?]) that topicality checks abuse.

 

Its a fun debate if your ready for it, if not then just use theory....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothesis-testing is old debate theory. The resolution is treated as a scientific hypothesis, and the goal of the round is to determine whether this hypothesis is true or false.

 

These days, the round is usually decided based on whether the affirmative's plan is a good idea, not whether the [/i]resolution[/i] is true. Today, the resolution is not treated as a scientific hypothesis. Instead, it's a topic that constrains what plans the affirmative is allowed to run. This produces much better cost/benefit analysis and much more fun debates. We're not going back to hypo-testing theory any time soon, and for good reason. Counterwarrants and justification presses (arguments that flourish in hypo-testing) are boring and useless. Besides, the resolution isn't written to be debated as a statement of fact.

 

See this article:

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/jbruschke/theory_and_practice_in_academic_.htm

and go to the "Judging Paradigms" section. There is a pretty good discussion of hypo-testing there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...