Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've been told that the best 2AC FW to read is "evaluate the consequences of the plan against the institutional adoption/enactment of the competitive alternative." Is this the best aff framework? What is the best wording of this FW? How exactly does this framework make sure that they have no access to K tricks, ensure fairness, or education? Or Reciprocity?

Edited by IMJUSTHARRY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think about what you want your framework to do for you, instead of just reading FW for the sake of it.

 

You've presumably read an Aff, and presumably it has an impact.

 

After reading the 1AC, you've told the judge that you have a plan and that they should vote for it because of that impact. If you weren't able to weigh that impact, the judge wouldn't have a reason to vote for the plan.

 

Try to shape your FW interpretation in a way that defends your right to weigh your impact.

 

There are 3 main types of interpretation:

 

Policy - something like "the Neg must present a competitive policy option or defend the status quo."

 

Middle Ground - something like you said - "weigh the Aff against the K."

 

Kritikal - what the Neg might say - "evaluate [representations, epistemology, etc.] before policy."

 

It's also good to think through the likely tricks a K might have up its sleeve. That means your interpretation might vary from debate to debate.

 

Against a Security K, I might read framework that says the judge should weigh the Aff against the K under the paradigm of the predictive validity of threat assessments. Not only am I telling the judge that they should compare the two, I'm giving them a tool to do so. Against a Cap K, I might argue that the judge should choose the best political-economic alternative in terms of utilitarian decision-making. It just depends.

 

I think it's fine when teams say "just weigh them" but this usually plays right into the hands of the Negative who can paste in a minute-and-a-half block about epistemology with a single keystroke.

 

Things you should be able to answer/defend:

-Epistemology

-Representations

-Discourse

-Method

-Fiat

-Switch-Side Debate

-Policy/Kritikal Education

-Ground

-Advocacy

  • Upvote 3

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...