Ask Jim about Debate
|
Breaking Down Barriers: Ask Jim about Debate |
You can submit questions too, just email Jim at hansonjb@whitman.edu
The best way of
arguing topicality is with a violation specific format. This
format emphasizes the plan's specific violation of the topic. To
do a violation specific topicality argument you present a
violation, then reasons why this violation is a good violation by
supporting your definition or interpretation, and then you state
why topicality is a voting issue. This approach is better than
the old standards, violations, impacts approach because it
encourages more specific and developed arguments for each
violation of the topic. Violation specific format topicality
arguments use the following format:
I. THE PLAN IS NOT TOPICAL
A. The Plan violates THIS term IN THE TOPIC
[Include definition and statement of how the plan violates the definition.]
B. This interpretation/definition is superior.
[Write in the reasons that your interpretation/definition is good.]
C. TOPICALITY IS A VOTING ISSUE
[State why topicality is a voting
issue.]
EXAMPLE VIOLATION SPECIFIC TOPICALITY FORMAT
(Note-this isn't a very strong argument-but it does show how to setup a topicality argument)
I. THE PLAN IS NOT TOPICAL
A. (THE PLAN) VIOLATES THE TERM PROGRAM
This is because the definition of program is:
(you would include a definition of program showing it just rules or regulations whereas a policy is an overall government objective)
The plan only focuses on rules and regulations--not a policy. It is therefore not topical.
B. DEVELOPING A COMPREHENSIVE POLICY SHOULD NOT BE TOPICAL
1. IT MAKES TERMS PRECISE
The affirmative blurs the distinction between policy and program. What difference exists between these words using the affirmative interpretation?
2. THE GOVERNMENT DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN REGULATIONS AND POLICIES
The government establishes policies that guide its overall actions. A program establishes specific rules and regulations thereby distinguishing them. We should adhere to the expertise of the government in making this distinction.
C. TOPICALITY IS A VOTING ISSUE
1. IT PROMOTES EDUCATION.
If the affirmative could run any case, the negative could never prepare. Debates would be very superficial.
2. IT IS A JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE.
If the affirmative case does not
support the resolution, it does not fall under the judge's
jurisdiction for making a decision. The judge should, therefore,
vote against the plan.
Each part of a
topicality argument requires careful development so that it can
be persuasive. In the following section, we will describe in more
detail how to develop each of the three parts of a topicality
argument.
Develop the Violations
The most important
part of a topicality argument is the violation. You should
research definitions for every important word in the topic.
Carefully examine the definitions. What do your definitions say
is topical and what is not topical? If a definition says that,
"the United States government is the central government in
Washington D.C. as opposed to the state and local
governments," a plan centering on any state or local
government is not topical. Use that definition in a violation
brief. Your violation brief should look like this:
GENERAL FORMAT FOR YOUR VIOLATIONS SECTION
A. (The Plan) violates (the term in the resolution*).
This is because the definition of (the term*) is:
(PLACE THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM HERE.)
So, because the affirmative plan (is not what the definition says it is*), it is not topical.
[*vary this part for each different
violation.]
EXAMPLE:
1. (The Plan) violates the terms "federal government" in the topic
This is because the definition of United States government is:
"The federal government is the central government in Washington D.C. as opposed to the state and local governments".
So, because the affirmative plan
includes state and local action, it is not topical.
Give Reasons Why Your Interpretation is Superior
There are many reasons you can offer to support your topicality interpretations or definitions. At a minimum, you can argue that:
Your definition comes from a more qualified or expert source.
Your definition is better grammatically.
Your definition is fairer to both sides.
Your definition clearly identifies the difference between affirmative and negative ground.
Your definition is clearer.
Your definition makes better sense.
Your definition exhibits better values.
Your interpretation avoids effects topicality.
Your definition is more precise.
Your definition is more contextual.
Be sure to identify
how your definition or interpretation specifically does any of
the above. For example, specifically state how your definition is
clearer or how precise your definition is.
Give Reasons Why Topicality is a Voting Issue
Topicality is an important voting issue in debate. You need to develop a brief with reasons that state why topicality is a voting issue. There are many other reasons that topicality may be considered a voting issue. We include three reasons here. First, topicality divides ground between the affirmative and negative. If the affirmative could support any case regardless of the topic, they could argue that the negative's position is also topical. The negative would never have a chance. Second, topicality may be a jurisdictional issue. If the affirmative plan does not fall into the area in which the judge has jurisdiction (the area in which the judge has the ability to make a decision), the judge may rule that the affirmative case should be ruled upon in another setting. Third, topicality ensures the educational value of debate. If affirmatives could support any case, negatives could never research adequately and debates would become very superficial. There are certainly more reasons that topicality is a voting issue and debaters are welcome to support other reasons.
Jim
Thanks to Bobby Brenman for asking this question.