Jump to content
debatefool

uniqe Disad aswers

Recommended Posts

A lot of the unique responses to disads are dependent on the content of the 1AC.

Like, telling the other team their disads don't exist is somewhat unique, but you can't argue that without biting unless your 1AC is tailored around something of that nature, like a security 1AC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read an ethics aff based around stopping shit that's happening right now, you can answer DA's with predictions bad, but that is most definitely not an argument that stands on its own, throw in some util bad and impact defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
besides the usuall turns, no-link, impact defens, no-link, what are some other uniqe disad answers that you could say during a round

 

Impact turns.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, there's a comprehensive taxonomy of possible disad responses at the purely causal/policy level:

 

Non-unique (including alt. causality)

No brink

Brink overwhelms the link

No link

Link turn

No internal

Internal link turn

No impact

Impact turn

Case outweighs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uniqueness overwhelms the link and brink overwhelms the link are equivalent in my taxonomy, unless there's some distinction I'm missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One I've seen is uniqueness overwhelms the link, but it doesn't work on every disad. Really only when uniqueness is more specific than the link.

 

You can definitely research that out on certain disads, rather than depending on their uniqueness evidence. A good type of disad that this would work on is politics. As an example, you can look at the recent debt ceiling scenario; there's lots of evidence saying that the GOP will cave regardless of their political bluster, which would make any effect the plan has on Obama's PC null.

 

In the context of politics, UQ overwhelms the link is an interesting, if unique [harhar], way to go on the uniqueness, but it gives you less offensive utility if you read link turns as well. I like the idea of it though.

 

Uniqueness overwhelms the link and brink overwhelms the link are equivalent in my taxonomy, unless there's some distinction I'm missing.

 

Hmm. UQ overwhelms the link means the status quo is too resistant to any change that the plan would have.

Brink overwhelms the link sounds more like an impact inevitable claim, that we're too close to the brink that regardless of the plan, the impacts will happen anyways. Wait... now that I think about it, that's just a nonunique, no?

Edited by JustAlex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, that's a good point. I've definitely heard "uniqueness overwhelms the link" much more commonly and I'm pretty sure I meant that when I said "brink overwhelms the link" (UQ is too strong, the link isn't sufficient to get us there). On your reading, (Brink is too strong, so link will be triggered regardless) I would basically classify it as a non-unique. Sorry for the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Add on advantage

 

2) Case solves the disad

 

3) Link Turns

 

4) Impact Turns

 

5) K-ing the disad (obviously this has limited application)

 

6) Try or die.

 

7) We own uniqueness (on the link or impact level)--according to Scott this is losing value.

 

8) Impact comparison.

 

9) Probability/Risk

 

10) Indicts of their evidence (this isn't reading cards as much as. This won't win a debate on an argument unless its close. The best however is when their evidence non-uniques itself or speaks to the inevitableness of the impact. When their evidence makes the argument for you--they can't go to their frontline file and pull out a frontline for that.

 

11) X impact or link is resiliant or cyclical.

 

12) History is on our side. Multiple instances of the link disprove your disadvantage. Or multiple instances of the impact being triggered but not happening disprove your story.

 

Stuff other people said...

 

Reading lines from the 1NC evidence in cross-examination is usually sufficient.

 

Also, near the end of my frontlines I think of tensions with other common arguments in the debate: counterplan, kritic (either the link, impact, or alternative), and typical case arguments. This is done 90 to 95% at home. In terms of the K--this is an in depth argument about the nature of their advocacy & how that effects the alternative.

 

Remember not to double turn yourself.

 

Example of case solves the disad--or at least the one I like the most is if your case solves softpower, international law, or multilateralism--to real a laundry list card to the most important impacts (economy, hege, terrorism, disease, and environment). This makes it rather hard to win the disad unless they are just killing you on the DA or have a counterplan or amazing solvency or case turns for the majority of the arguments (aka advantages) on the case.

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laker24 said one of the possible answers is Intrinsicness... what does that mean, ive heard it used before but never only understood what they ment (except on counterplan theory debate.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intrinsicness tests the germaneness of the disad link to the plan. The argument is that the disad must be the unavoidable result of the affirmative. It argues that if something else could be done to prevent the link, then it should be done. You can do this by either saying the disad is not intrinsic to the plan, or in some instances, making a permutation. For example on a politics disad, you could say that a rational policy maker would pass the plan and the politics scenario. It’s usually justified by the fact that the link can be overcome simply by doing both or taking an extra action. Other disads it could work on are spending-tradeoff DAs or on this topic, redeployment DAs, etc.

 

It’s definitely a strategic time tradeoff; it takes less than 5 seconds to make in the 2AC. It’ll take the negative longer to answer, if they don’t drop it altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People, I pretty sure bdebate means truely unique disad answers, like eating their paper the disad is written on or endorsing bill o'reilly

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People, I pretty sure bdebate means truely unique disad answers, ....[blah]....endorsing bill o'reilly

 

 

there's been a miscommunication?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
besides the usuall turns, no-link, impact defens, no-link, what are some other uniqe disad answers that you could say during a round

 

vote no

compartmentalization...

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...