uil capital conference

UIL Capital Conference CX Debate: Advanced Argumentation

Anthony Yim Samin Agha

Session Overview

Part 1 – When to run a Kritik

Part 2 – Structure

Part 3 – Categories

Part 4 – Sample K debate walkthrough

When should I try to be “cool?”

Must meet 4 conditions:

1.  There should be an important flaw in the topic or the opposing teams position

2.  Judge should be receptive

3.  The team introducing the K should have both the knowledge and research base to launch the attack

4.  The attack should be understandable both in intent and structure

Structure

  Link   Generic

  Advantage Specific

  Plan Specific

  Impact   Value to Life

  Utilitarianism

  Root Cause

  Alternative   Alt Text?

  Alt Framework?

  Role of the Ballot

Category 1 – Language

 Attacks the opponents for using words in a harmful or risk creating way

 Examples:  Nuclear War Reps  Racist Language  Sexist Language  Etc.

Category 2 - Thinking

  Challenge the way participants construct and/or systemize their reasoning. Sometimes challenge the form of debate

  Examples:   Queer Theory

  Black Aesthetic

  Etc.

Category 3 - Value

  Include a large variety of methods to identify and attack ethical or moral beliefs found behind what teams do and say

  Examples:   Statism

  Nietzsche

  Capitalism

  Etc.

Kritik Buzz Words Demystified

  Metaphysics- attempts to clarify the fundamental notions by which people understand the world, e.g. existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility. 2 Branches A.   Ontology – the investigation into the basic

categories of being and they relate to each other B.  Cosmology – the study of the totality of all

phenomena within the universe (not common)

  Epistemology- analyzes the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification

  Ressentiment – French word for resentment.

Capitalism Kritik

Handout

How to Answer the K

1.  Case Outweighs: essentially, the solvency deficit outweighs the net benefit, the neg’s inability to solve the case is a reason they should lose, this includes the framework debate.

2.  Link Turn: an argument that the plan solves for the link (non-uniqueness isn’t required as there is no uniqueness for the original link) or a Permutations

3.  Impact Turn: an argument that the foundation of the Kritik is incorrect and that the impacts it claims are actually good

Answering the K Cont.

4. Alternative – DA to what a world of the alt looks like, solvency of alt

5. Theory: an argument that addresses the underlying theoretical implications of the Kritik and how it affects debate

a.  Kritiks are illegitimate

b.  b. The alternative is…unpredictable, vague, fluid, not written, plan-inclusive, inconsistent with the rest of their arguments, etc…

Extending the Kritik in the

Neg Block