Breaking Down Barriers: Ask Jim about Debate Return to the BDB List of Questions

You can submit questions too, just email Jim at hansonjb@whitman.edu

How do you argue turns against solvency and disadvantages?

To get turns, you obviously need to research or, and this happens more frequently than you might think with your aff, use the evidence and arguments you already have to make turns.

Solvency/Case turns

1. Argue the plan actually increases the problems the affirmative cites in their case
2. Argue that the plan will cause a new problem-be sure to impact this new problem. For example, if the advantage is that the plan reduces congestion on a freeway, your turn can argue that the plan harms the environment-then you need to impact harm to the environment. These kinds of solvency turns are like "mini-disadvantages" that you argue directly against the affirmative case.
3. Argue that the affirmative advantage is actually a disadvantage. For example, if the affirmative argues their plan increases economic growth-argue that economic growth is bad (it causes environmental damage, etc.).

Disad turns

1. Use your case advantage as a turn

pick a specific card in the 1ac that shows something else will happen; for example, your plan reduces crime so the public won't think you are increasing crime

2. Turn the link

get cards saying that your plan decreases the problem the disad claims will happen; or get cards that say the status quo policy increases the problem the disad claims will happen

3. Turn the impact

show that the "problem" the negative claims will happen actually is a good thing; for example, if the negative claims your plan will undermine bipartisanship in congress which will cause nafta to not be extended­­then argue nafta extension would be bad (note­­be sure to be ready to argue that nafta will be extended in the present system so that only your plan will stop it from being extended).

Note­­be sure to impact turns that have a different impact from the one in the disadvantage or advantage you are attacking­­so, if you claim your plan reduces nuclear proliferation against a "less US leadership increases the risk of war" disadvantage, you need to impact how harmful nuclear proliferation is.

Special Note: "Turning the Tables" is a special kind of turn because it involves agreeing with your opposition's argument and saying that their own argument actually supports your case.

Jim

thanks to "mudopie" for this question

Send Jim an e-mail if you have other tips