Jump to content
braininthavat

Aff discourse Ks

Recommended Posts

The aff can make plenty of discourse arguments, including, but not limited to, language Ks. 

 

The important question you have to answer is 'why does that win you the round? What is your theory of debate?'  If you can answer that for whatever your discourse is, you have a viable aff.  (If you can answer it well, you may even have a winning aff).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The aff can make plenty of discourse arguments, including, but not limited to, language Ks. 

 

The important question you have to answer is 'why does that win you the round? What is your theory of debate?'  If you can answer that for whatever your discourse is, you have a viable aff.  (If you can answer it well, you may even have a winning aff).

Awesome. Just needed to make sure neg can't just shout topicality if I advocate the disuse of words in the res.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome. Just needed to make sure neg can't just shout topicality if I advocate the disuse of words in the res.

 

Well, they can shout "topicality", but your defense doesn't have to be "nuh-uh, we're actually topical".  Once you step into the grimdark world of "screw the resolution", you have to defend not defending the resolution.

 

Edit: I don't know how kosher that is in LD.  It flies in policy, at least with some judges.

Edited by Squirrelloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome. Just needed to make sure neg can't just shout topicality if I advocate the disuse of words in the res.

That's not what Squirreloid said :) Of course Neg can run topicality! You just have to beat it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome. Just needed to make sure neg can't just shout topicality if I advocate the disuse of words in the res.

 

But they can... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure that in the 1AC you have evidence that indicate why having what you are critiquing in the rez/debate space is bad and how we should engage in the debate space. Basically, have preemptive "topicality" answers in the 1AC that is not "contention '_' is preempts" but rather you impacts indicate that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're kritiking the discourse rez that gives you good counter standards on topicality. The only standard that works against you is switch side debate, because people should already be prepared to debate these kritiks of the rez when they are aff, so all "predictability" arguments go out the window. At the point where you win switch side good for education, k affs of the resolution can easily win a t/framework debate. I would suggest a counter interpretation that the affirmative's job is to determine an action in the direction of the resolution. 

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...