Jump to content
Jullianv1

Need explanation on simple things

Recommended Posts

Im doing policy for the first time next year- and despite all my reading- I don't get inherency that much. Why do I need to show why the policy has some kind of barrier? And, why do I need to show why it wouldn't be passed now? I also am confused on what "Scenarios" are- I've seen them in some cases and I'm wondering what they mean (I understand advantages but not scenarios). 

 

For the neg I have a specific question- for counterplans can your actor be different? Like instead of the U.S increasing engagement, could I argue that maybe Mexico should? 

 

Also a broader question- im scared ill face cases I have nothing prepped for/no idea how to respond to. How would I deal with this?

 

 

 

Sorry for the novicey questions, and thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inherency is the status quo, basically what is going on in the squo that's bad-pre plan. An inherent barrier, is what is stopping your plan from passing on its own right now. Asking what your inherent barrier is, is pretty much the only thing that novices ask.

 

Scenarios are kinda like an advantage within an advantage. Scenarios are used a lot when there is only one advantage to the aff.

 

Ex: 

Advantage is prolif- scenarios within the advantage are maybe South korea prolif, and india prolif. People use them so when one scenario of the advantage is turned or something, the aff can just kick out of that specific scenario, and still have offense due to other scenarios. 

 

 

On the cp question- the actor can definitly be different, in fact most people encourage untopical counterplans.

 

 

If you find yourself not prepped out for affs regularly- politics will be your friend

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Your "inherent barrier" isn't strictly speaking necessary and only novices will ask about it. The reason you need inherency in general, though, is if your plan is already happening then voting aff doesn't do anything. A non-inherent plan also has no advantages - if your plan is happening now and your advantages haven't happened then you empirically have no solvency.

 

2. A scenario is a mini-advantage. The reason it's a scenario and not its own advantage is that it uses the same internal link as another scenario. For example, "South China Sea conflict is inevitable" could lead to "SCS conflict goes nuclear" for a scenario and "SCS conflict collapses the economy" as another scenario. EyeOfSauron is spot on with why scenarios can be strategic.

 

3. The actor for your CP can be whoever you want it to be, although you may hear some theory about why certain CPs are illegitimate (For your Mexico example, some debaters may argue international counterplans are bad). The biggest rule of thumb is that if you can find a solvency advocate, your CP is probably legitimate.

 

4. Topicality is your friend for cases you know nothing about. A good strategy is to cut two contradictory T violations (e.g. "Engagement must be unconditional" and "Engagement must be conditional") since they will always link to one of them. You can also cut answers to common advantages, rather than plans. I feel like a lot of novice cases will have a relations advantage, so "China relations bad" will come in handy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inherency is basically part of what makes your case and plan important! The idea of the case is to show that 1. Bad things are happening, and 2. No one is doing anything about it. Negs argue inherency a lot because they want to show that the status quo is great and fine because it's taking care of your problems. After all. the aff defends the resolution, to change. The neg wants to stay the same so they defend what's happening right now.

 

For the cp: Your counterplan should most definitely be non topical, so your counterplan can be completely different from the aff and resolution AS LONG as you can solve for the aff's harms and solve for any disads you pull on the aff!

 

If you truly don't know how to argue against a case, there are lots of things you can do!

Your options are:

If you truly have nothing, it might be very non topical. Look closely at their plan to see what you can attack.

 

Analytics! You can basically just have rational arguments by analyzing their 1ac. (without evidence. Just argue it how you would debate something with your parents or friends.)

 

There are lots of disadvantages on open ev you can use for any topical case. These may not be strong, but some are!

 

There are lots of arguments you can use against any kind of engagement with China.

 

Later in the season, there are a lot of broad Kritiks that apply to a lot of affs. 

 

Same with counterplans^

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just have a K for the aff and neg, you don't need inherency or competition or links. Its the best of both worlds. I hope this helped!

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys! 

So ive gotten that I should have stock arguments- like Ks and T shells that could apply to anyone. But, my big thing is the idea of "no-clash." What if my aff has nothing to do with their neg, do i just do a weighing match? I think I just answered my own question

 

Also, is a solvency advocate just like an actor that can actually do things? AND-what was meant by "politics?" Like is this another debate term XD- little lost.

 

I did LD last year and was pretty good- but I want to do policy. The only that keeps tripping me up is the nuances and terms and the odd structure thats so different than what im used to. 2AC?? 

 

But thanks anyways, yall have been very helpful

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm prepping one of my friends who is starting policy this year too. I made this list of things I wish someone had told me my freshman year. Some of these might seem a little obvious to you since you've already had LD experience  :D

 

  1. Follow your roadmap. A roadmap is an outline of your argument before your speech. It is not counted as part of your speech. Usually

  2.  You have to run a topicality in the 1nc, before any other argument

  3. Try to follow the neg’s roadmap as an aff. It makes judges happy.

  4. If a judge tells you they don’t like a specific argument DO NOT RUN IT. AT ALL.

  5. Make sure to always ask for the judge’s paradigm while the other team is in the room before the round. If you have specific questions about arguments you like to run ESPECIALLY AS A NEG, ask away.

  6. When a neg is asking a judge’s paradigm, pay attention to the questions they ask. It will give you insight into what they might run against your aff.

  7. NEVER LEAVE ANY PREP TIME LEFT. You can always make your speeches better and your arguments more insightful.

  8. Some judges HATE when you don’t use a lot of prep time on your 1AR they think it’s rude idk.

  9. DO NOT BE RUDE IN CX. Ask your questions and if you have to interrupt them, apologize briskly. Sometimes it can come down to the last speaker point for you to move forward.

  10. Always be nice before and after rounds. Debate's all in good fun!!

  11. If you run a counterplan, you must keep arguing solvency and such for that counterplan until the end of the round. It’s not like any argument. It’s like the aff’s plan and you must defend it….unless you’re running conditionality theory but we will get into that later..

  12. If you’re reading from a computer DO NOT BURY YOUR FACE or bend over. Stand up straight at all times and you can even hold up your computer. TO THE SIDE.

  13. If you see a team that has no computers and only paper evidence and it’s a flip round. PLEASE GO AFF. There is a very high likelihood you will win cuz they don’t have the access to ten million files.

  14. Do not let a CX’er stomp all over you in cross-examination. If they’re asking you a question like “ Why do you hate America?” or "Do you not care about the sanctity of life?" Do not take that mess. 

  15. Judges can and WILL judge you based how you’re dressed. Yeah.

  16. If you are the 2n, PLEASE remember to ask for their 1ac in your cx. AT THE END. If you ask in the beginning you’re standing there with paper in your hand for no reason. And they probably won’t be able to answer questions as well.

  17. If you are planning on running a topicality, ask the definition of that word in your cx time before your speech. 

  18. If you’re running a CP, you must include net benefits. IDC.

  19. It’s always best to include framework with topicality/kritiks/counterplans etc. Lots of judges love to hear theory.

  20. Work the angle of “my cp/alt/squo is better than the aff or vice versa because so and so..” Judges wanna know why you should win.

  21. DO not forget your impact calculus, please.

  22. If you’re going up against an unprepared negative, don’t only have a 4 minute long 2ac because that’s how long the 1nc was. Take those other four minutes to build your case and plan. Earns you brownie points with judges. And is fundamentally better for your case.

  23. You cannot just argue k is bad theory and not answer anything on the kritik. You will die. Unless your judge hates them maybe..

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inherency is basically part of what makes your case and plan important! The idea of the case is to show that 1. Bad things are happening, and 2. No one is doing anything about it. Negs argue inherency a lot because they want to show that the status quo is great and fine because it's taking care of your problems. After all. the aff defends the resolution, to change. The neg wants to stay the same so they defend what's happening right now.

 

For the cp: Your counterplan should most definitely be non topical, so your counterplan can be completely different from the aff and resolution  and solve for any disads you pull on the aff!

 

If you truly don't know how to argue against a case, there are lots of things you can do!

Your options are:

If you truly have nothing, it might be very non topical. Look closely at their plan to see what you can attack.

 

Analytics! You can basically just have rational arguments by analyzing their 1ac. (without evidence. Just argue it how you would debate something with your parents or friends.)

 

There are lots of disadvantages on open ev you can use for any topical case. These may not be strong, but some are!AS LONG as you can solve for the aff's harms

 

There are lots of arguments you can use against any kind of engagement with China.

 

Later in the season, there are a lot of broad Kritiks that apply to a lot of affs. 

 

Same with counterplans^

CPs dont need to solve for the aff. You can just outweigh or something if that floats your boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CPs dont need to solve for the aff. You can just outweigh or something if that floats your boat

Then it's not really a counterplan.....the whole point of a counterplan is another way to fix an issue. Isn't it just a completely different plan by that point? And I feel like that would destroy a lot of clash in the round because then you'd just be arguing over completely different impacts and how this type of extinction is worse than this.. I don't see how that would help as neg.. right? idk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys! 

So ive gotten that I should have stock arguments- like Ks and T shells that could apply to anyone. But, my big thing is the idea of "no-clash." What if my aff has nothing to do with their neg, do i just do a weighing match? I think I just answered my own question

 

Also, is a solvency advocate just like an actor that can actually do things? AND-what was meant by "politics?" Like is this another debate term XD- little lost.

 

I did LD last year and was pretty good- but I want to do policy. The only that keeps tripping me up is the nuances and terms and the odd structure thats so different than what im used to. 2AC?? 

 

But thanks anyways, yall have been very helpful

 

1- If their neg has nothing to do with your aff, that's good. Point it out to the Judge. Emphasize how their positions don't link into your plan => their impacts won't happen because of the plans passage. It's still a good idea to try and address their positions that don't link with defense, just for insurance. Always do weighing- if they don't link, pose it in "even if" format. i.e. "even if the plan links into the terror DA, warming is worse - here's why."

 

2- A solvency advocate is basically evidence advocating for the passage/ implementation of your counterplan. You always want to have these with CPs, a piece of evidence saying "renewable incentives solve warming" or something. Cp's without a solvency advocate sound dumb i.e. "Text: China should do it..... yeah"

 

3- Politics, lol. Politics is the name of the most common and generic disadvantage in debate. Politics setup goes like this.

- random bill in congress is going to pass, but barely.

- (parts of) congress doesn't like the plan

- Plan pisses of congress, they don't vote for that other bill (thing called political capital)

- that other bill solves extinction. 

 

Politics is a good generic DA because the only link you need for aff's is "the aff is unpopular." There are like a billion other threads on this site for politics. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So I'm prepping one of my friends who is starting policy this year too. I made this list of things I wish someone had told me my freshman year. Some of these might seem a little obvious to you since you've already had LD experience  :D

 

  1. Follow your roadmap. A roadmap is an outline of your argument before your speech. It is not counted as part of your speech. Usually

  2.  You have to run a topicality in the 1nc, before any other argument

  3. Try to follow the neg’s roadmap as an aff. It makes judges happy.

  4. If a judge tells you they don’t like a specific argument DO NOT RUN IT. AT ALL.

  5. Make sure to always ask for the judge’s paradigm while the other team is in the room before the round. If you have specific questions about arguments you like to run ESPECIALLY AS A NEG, ask away.

  6. When a neg is asking a judge’s paradigm, pay attention to the questions they ask. It will give you insight into what they might run against your aff.

  7. NEVER LEAVE ANY PREP TIME LEFT. You can always make your speeches better and your arguments more insightful.

  8. Some judges HATE when you don’t use a lot of prep time on your 1AR they think it’s rude idk.

  9. DO NOT BE RUDE IN CX. Ask your questions and if you have to interrupt them, apologize briskly. Sometimes it can come down to the last speaker point for you to move forward.

  10. Always be nice before and after rounds. Debate's all in good fun!!

  11. If you run a counterplan, you must keep arguing solvency and such for that counterplan until the end of the round. It’s not like any argument. It’s like the aff’s plan and you must defend it….unless you’re running conditionality theory but we will get into that later..

  12. If you’re reading from a computer DO NOT BURY YOUR FACE or bend over. Stand up straight at all times and you can even hold up your computer. TO THE SIDE.

  13. If you see a team that has no computers and only paper evidence and it’s a flip round. PLEASE GO AFF. There is a very high likelihood you will win cuz they don’t have the access to ten million files.

  14. Do not let a CX’er stomp all over you in cross-examination. If they’re asking you a question like “ Why do you hate America?” or "Do you not care about the sanctity of life?" Do not take that mess. 

  15. Judges can and WILL judge you based how you’re dressed. Yeah.

  16. If you are the 2n, PLEASE remember to ask for their 1ac in your cx. AT THE END. If you ask in the beginning you’re standing there with paper in your hand for no reason. And they probably won’t be able to answer questions as well.

  17. If you are planning on running a topicality, ask the definition of that word in your cx time before your speech. 

  18. If you’re running a CP, you must include net benefits. IDC.

  19. It’s always best to include framework with topicality/kritiks/counterplans etc. Lots of judges love to hear theory.

  20. Work the angle of “my cp/alt/squo is better than the aff or vice versa because so and so..” Judges wanna know why you should win.

  21. DO not forget your impact calculus, please.

  22. If you’re going up against an unprepared negative, don’t only have a 4 minute long 2ac because that’s how long the 1nc was. Take those other four minutes to build your case and plan. Earns you brownie points with judges. And is fundamentally better for your case.

  23. You cannot just argue k is bad theory and not answer anything on the kritik. You will die. Unless your judge hates them maybe..

 

 

Honestly, I think there are far too many things that are useful to know when debating as a novice, and it's really best to give small portions of advice where it matters. Debate is a learning experience. I won a finals round in Ruston as a novice and one of my favorite ulums gave me a sh*tload of advice about the debate, and I didn't comprehend any of it because I was so busy packing up (paper debate really sucks).

 

Also, just one thing to add: Try to use all of your time in speeches, and if you find that you have tons of time left over, prepare more. Ask some debaters for some extra things to read like theory or... util back-files... There's always somethings else you can read. (Note: If the 1NC is one minute or you're crushing the debate by a landslide, don't spend eight minutes thinking of more stuff to say: It saves everyone's time).

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think there are far too many things that are useful to know when debating as a novice, and it's really best to give small portions of advice where it matters. Debate is a learning experience. I won a finals round in Ruston as a novice and one of my favorite ulums gave me a sh*tload of advice about the debate, and I didn't comprehend any of it because I was so busy packing up (paper debate really sucks).

 

Also, just one thing to add: Try to use all of your time in speeches, and if you find that you have tons of time left over, prepare more. Ask some debaters for some extra things to read like theory or... util back-files... There's always somethings else you can read. (Note: If the 1NC is one minute or you're crushing the debate by a landslide, don't spend eight minutes thinking of more stuff to say: It saves everyone's time).

I don't think it's a good idea just to read cards for no reason, especially if it's a new link card in the 1NR because it justifies a new argument in the 1AR.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×