Theory File Final

Theory
AFFIRMATIVE THEORY BLOCKS.................................................................................2

Dispo/Condi Bad..............................................................................................................3
PIC’s Bad.........................................................................................................................4
50 State Fiat Bad..............................................................................................................5
International Fiat Bad .....................................................................................................6
Agent Counterplans Bad .................................................................................................7
Delay CP’s Bad................................................................................................................8
Severance Perms Good....................................................................................................9
Intrinsic Perms Good.....................................................................................................10
Multiple Perms Good ....................................................................................................11
.......................................................................................................................................11
Neg Fiat Bad..................................................................................................................12
Object Fiat Bad..............................................................................................................13
2NC CP’s Bad................................................................................................................14
Floating PIC’s Bad.........................................................................................................15
No Text to the Alternative Bad......................................................................................16
NEGATIVE THEORY BLOCKS......................................................................................17
Condi Good....................................................................................................................18
Dispo Good ...................................................................................................................19
PIC’s Good.....................................................................................................................20
50 State Fiat Good.........................................................................................................21
International Fiat Good .................................................................................................22
Agent Counterplans Good. ............................................................................................23
Delay CP’s Good............................................................................................................24
Multiple Perms Bad.......................................................................................................25
Severance Perms Bad.....................................................................................................26
Intrinsic Perms Bad........................................................................................................27
Neg Fiat Good................................................................................................................28
Object Fiat Good............................................................................................................29
2NC CP’s Good..............................................................................................................30
1
AFFIRMATIVE THEORY BLOCKS
2
Dispo/Condi Bad
1. Irresponsible negation- prevents coherent negation, justifies contradictions, and

allows them to shift out of our offense
2. Strat and Time skew- we have to debate the squo and the cp which means they
can just go for the one we undercovered, making the aff rebuttals unfairly difficult
and rendering part of our speeches moot.
3. Multiple possible worlds bad
a. Forces judge intervention
b. Isn’t reciprocal- we get one world, they shouldn’t get two
c. Hurts the quality of policy comparison of prevents in-depth debate and
education because we have to debate 2 worlds
4. Infinitely regressive- all the args that support on conditional counterplan are also
defenses of multiple counterplans, which are illegit.
5. Not Real World- policy makers can’t straight turn a policy to kill it.
6. Inconsistent advocacies- kills clash and education by allowing them to duck out
of a failed cp
7. Dispo is Condi in disguise (Dispo bad only)-they can force us to go for the perm
by reading a bunch of add-on advantages to the cp. Neg has the block to respond
to the straight turn, forcing us to read defense.
8. Voter for fairness and education.
3
PIC’s Bad
1. Steals aff ground- makes the 1ac moot and makes it difficult to generate offense,
killing fairness.
2. Education- makes trivial issues the focus of the debate
3. Forces the aff to debate against themselves- makes it difficult for us to generate
offense which destroys fairness.
4. Justifies vague plan texts- PIC’s give incentive to write vague plan texts. This
kills real world education because we don’t debate a specific plan of action. This
also hurts neg ground because vagueness allows the aff to spike out of links.
5. Infinitely regressive- they can PIC out of a word, a comma, or a penny.
6. Not key to education/strat- DA’s test the comparative necessity of the plan. The
CP isn’t necessary.
7. Voter for fairness and education
4
50 State Fiat Bad
1. Not real world- no policy maker has the option or has ever passed legislation in
all 50 states. The impact is real world education.
2. Unfair Research Burden- the neg has to research the USFG whereas we have to
research energy policy in all 50 states, killing fairness.
3. No support in the lit- we challenge the neg to find where unanimous state action is
advocated.
4. Not Reciprocal- the aff gets one actor, the neg shouldn’t get 50 actors for reasons
of fairness.
5. Infinitely regressive- If 50 states can pass the same plan, what’s to stop the neg
from a cp that has all countries commit to world peace. They justify unfair
multiple actor advantage cp’s, which are illegit.
6. Lose aff ground- difficult to get offensive args against all 50 states acting at the
same time.
7. Predictability- they can claim advantages off of one of the 50 states acting and we
can’t predict which state or what.
5
International Fiat Bad
1. Not reciprocal – we only get the USFG, and the neg is allowed the entire world.
2. Infinitely regressive – the neg is able to choose whatever country they want, we
can’t predict whatever they’re going to say.
3. Unfair Research burden– aff has to research 193 countries while the neg
researches the USFG not fair because the burden is so much greater on the aff.
4. Predictability – aff can’t predict what the neg will say because they have so much
to choose from, makes it too hard to win the counterplan.
5. Jurisdiction- real world policy makers only have the power to implement policies
within their jurisdiction. (int’l actions not in your jurisdiction)
6
Agent Counterplans Bad
1. Not reciprocal – the Neg can take any USFG agent they want – we’re bound to
the USFG as a whole.
2. Forces aff to debate against itself – neg steals all our offense and arguing against
counterplan is arguing against plan.
3. Unpredictable- allows the neg to choose any part of the USFG, it’s too big to
research all the possible agents.
4. Kills topic specific education – we don’t talk about the actual impacts of energy
policy, we only talk about the process in the USFG
5. Not key to education/ground- DA’s test the comparative necessity of the plan.
The CP is not necessary.
7
Delay CP’s Bad
1. Unpredictable- we can’t predict what time they’ll delay action to.

2. Unfair research burden- it’s difficult to research the future because the future is
uncertain.
3. Kills Aff ground- it’s difficult to produce offense against the uncertain future.
4. Education- we don’t learn about the future, we just guess.
5. Time skew- they steal the entire 1ac with a counterplan that does the plan.
6. Forces us to debate against ourselves- they pass our plan, forcing us to debate
against our plan, which is unfair.
7. Infinite regression- they could pick an infinite number of times to delay action to.
8
Severance Perms Good
1. Best policy option –we debate the perm, the plan, and the counterplan, allowing
us to find the best policy option.
2. Most real world – congress is allowed to remove sections of bills. Debate trains
us to be policy makers.
3. Neg Block checks – they have 13 minutes of the block to answer the 8 minute
2AC with the perm.
4. Increases strategic thinking – severance makes the neg adapt just as the 2AC
adapts to the 1NC.
5. Education- debating the perm, plan, and cp increases education.
6. Reject the argument not the team- perms are just a test of competition, not an
advocacy, so we shouldn’t be voted down for a bad perm.
9
Intrinsic Perms Good
1. Search for the best policy- debating the perm, plan, and cp allows us to find the best
policy.
2. Real World- congressmen add sections to legislation all the time. The purpose of
debate is to train policy makers.
3. The Block checks abuse- the neg has 13 minutes to answer the 8 minute 2AC with the
perm.
4. Education- debating the perm, plan, and cp increases education.
5. Reject the argument not the team- perms are just a test of competition, not an
advocacy, so we shouldn’t be voted down for a bad perm.
10
Multiple Perms Good
1. Tests of competition – they’re not advocacies, so we don’t open up more worlds.

2. Neg block checks time skew – neg block skews 1ar time more than perms skew
the block.
3. Reciprocal – neg gets to read multiple off cases, we respond with multiple perms.
4. Education – we get to go more in-depth into the competitiveness of the
counterplan and more perms means more education.
5. Condi/Dispo checks- they can drop the CP, mooting the time we spent on the
perms.
Reject the arguments not the team- perms are just a test of competition, not an
advocacy, so we shouldn’t be voted down.
11
Neg Fiat Bad
1. Illogical decision making- logical decision making is the squo versus the plan.
Neg fiat is a departure from this.
2. Unfair Balance of ground- neg fiat gives the neg counterplans and the squo which
skews ground unfairly.
3. Predictability- we can’t predict what they will fiat.
4. Infinite regression- there are an infinite number of things they could fiat. This
explodes the research burden and kills fairness.
5. In depth education- neg fiat prevents us from going in depth into the status quo.
6. Resolutional basis- “should not” is not in the resolution, so neg has no basis for
fiat. “Should” gives the aff a normative basis for fiat.
7. Not key to ground/education- DA’s test the comparative necessity of the plan.
The CP isn’t necessary.
12
Object Fiat Bad
1. Steals aff ground- steals the impacts to our 1ac, making the 1ac moot and making
it difficult to produce offense.
2. Forces us to debate against ourselves- causes us to debate against our own harms
we read in the 1ac.
3. Not real world- no policy maker has the option to fiat world peace.
4. Unfair research burden- impossible to produce offense against world peace or the
elimination of racism.
13
2NC CP’s Bad
1. Time skew- the neg gets 13 minutes and we only have 5 minutes to respond to a
new argument and we are unable to draw upon the 2AC. Has the potential to
make the 2AC moot if they go for it.
2. Not reciprocal- the aff can’t read the plan in the 2AC, the neg shouldn’t be
allowed to read a counterplan in the 2NC.
3. Infinite regression- 2NC counterplans justify 2NR counterplans which destroy
education because we can’t go in-depth.
4. In depth education- we have less time to respond, meaning we can’t go as in depth
into the argument.
14
Floating PIC’s Bad
1. Cross apply all the reasons PIC’s are bad.

2. Forces us to debate against ourselves- forces us to debate against our plan, making
it difficult to generate offense.
3. Steals aff ground- it’s difficult to get offense against a word or representation we
made.
4. Irresponsible argumentation and shifting advocacies- floating PIC’s have the neg
shift to supporting the plan and then rejecting the plan, which creates
irresponsibility and kills education and fairness.
15
No Text to the Alternative Bad
1. Moving target- no text means they can shift out of our offense.
2. Not reciprocal- the aff must write a plan text so the neg should have a text to their
alternative.
3. Justifies irresponsible argumentation- allows them to change their advocacy and
not be responsible for their original advocacy.
4. Education- makes it impossible to go in depth into the specifics of the alternative.
5. Kills aff ground- difficult to produce arguments against an unclear alternative.
16
NEGATIVE THEORY BLOCKS
17
Condi Good
1. Spurs critical thinking – Aff has to pick their best arguments for both the squo and
the cp.
2. Perms check abuse – their perms are a greater time skew.
3. No impact to multiple worlds.
4. Most real world – Congressmen change their minds all the time for no reason.
Policy debate trains us for the world of policy making.
5. Logical decision making- not having the option of the squo would be an extreme
departure from decision making.
6. Time skew inevitable- the 1AR has 5 minutes to answer the 13 minute block.
7. All arguments are condi- we should be able to drop a CP just as we drop T.
Generics
Checks Aff bias- aff gets infinite prep, first and last speeches, and lit bias
Negation theory- we are fulfilling our job which is to reject the plan
Search for the best policy- we use the arg to find the best policy
No voter- reject the arg not the team.
18
Dispo Good
1. Puts the aff in control – they can straight turn forcing us to have the counterplan the rest
of the debate.
2. All arguments are dispo – we should be able to kick cp’s like we kick DA’s or topicality.
3. Perms check abuse – multiple perms are a worse times screw.
4. No impact to multiple worlds.
5. Logical decision making- not having the option of the squo would be an extreme
departure from decision making.
6. Time skew inevitable –a thirteen minute neg block is always going to pressure the 1AR.
7. Increases strategic thinking- forces the aff to pick their best args against the squo and the
counterplan, improving education.
8. Real world- policy makers change their minds all the time if they see an option is not as
good.
Generics
19
PIC’s Good
1. Aff should have to defend the entirety of their plan- allowing the aff to spike out
of part of their plan kills fairness
2. Education- trivialities matter.
a. In-depth because we go deep into the details of the plan
b. Real world because congressmen discuss specifics of bills.
3. Neg Ground- Almost all CP’s are PIC’s. Rejecting these destroys fairness and
education by reducing the number of neg options.
4. Net benefit and solvency checks abuse- PIC’s are grounded in the literature which
limits what we can PIC out of.
5. We don’t steal aff ground- aff can easily produce a solvency deficit for whatever
is changed in the plan text.
Generics
20
50 State Fiat Good
1. Tests the Resolution- tests the words “Federal Government” in the resolution
2. Key to Neg Ground- 50 states cp key part of neg ground especially on energy
incentives
3. Increases Critical Thinking- forces arg thought on the fly and the aff to defend all
parts of their plan
4. Education- we learn about policy making at the state level versus the national
level.
5. Real world impossible- debate is not real world. Fiat doesn’t exist in the real
world.
6. Resolution mandates- states are an integral part of energy policy that needs to be
debated.
7. Increases aff ground- allows aff to read a DA against one of 50 states
8. Rooted in the Lit- many authors discuss energy policy at the state and federal
level.
9. Reciprocal- USFG includes many branches and agencies that the aff gets to have
act.
Generics
21
International Fiat Good
1. Tests the resolution – Aff has to defend the USFG action.

2. Solvency and net benefits check abuse – only a few countries have solvency
advocates for alternative energy.
3. Reciprocal – Aff gets the entirety of the federal government – it’s so big they
could choose a tiny department as well.
4. Combats ethnocentrism- we destroy the focus that the US is the only legit actor.
Given the negative perceptions about the US around the world, combating
ethnocentrism via CP is good.
Generics
22
Agent Counterplans Good.
1. Checks aff bias – aff gets first and last speech and infinite prep.
2. Negation theory – neg’s burden is to prove aff wrong
3. Best policy option – the flaw in the plan leads us to try and get the best policy
option at the end of the round
4. Reject the argument not the team.
5. Aff must defend USFG- They provide it as an agent, and we can make them
justify anything in their plan .
6. Education – we learn the most about how actions go through the government- this
is perfect training for when we become policy makers.
7. Reciprocal – aff could have chosen any part of the USFG in their speech, like the
EPA, but they didn’t.
8. Perms check – they can claim the same benefits as we do.
23
Delay CP’s Good
1. Education- we learn more by debating the future and the present.

2. Net benefit checks abuse- we need a net benefit for a counterplan. This solves
back their unpredictability and infinite regression claims.
3. Tests the entirety of the plan text- makes the aff defend the time of
implementation of their plan.
4. Test of the resolution- “should” implies immediate action which is tested by the
delay CP.
Generics
24
Multiple Perms Bad
1. Time skew – aff is able to read perms in a short time – we have to take much
more time answering them, that’s unfair because they make less time available to
answer the rest of the speech.
2. Multiple worlds- aff allows for more scenarios- this is bad because it’s
unpredictable and they could advocate any of the perms in the end of the round
3. Spikes out of links- aff can just put perms on the counterplans to spike out of all
our disads – makes it impossible to win that our cp is competitive.
4. Kills in-depth education – we don’t spend time talking about the actual plan and
the way it works – we come here to learn about policy and the perms take us
away from that.
Multiple perms are a voter for fairness and education.
25
Severance Perms Bad
1. Plan is the focus of the debate: we base our 1NC on the plan and the 1AC. They
must unconditionally advocate the plan.
2. Moving target: severance perms allow the aff to spike out of our DA’s and net
benefit, which is illegit.
3. Unpredictable: we can’t predict what parts of the plan they will sever out of. This
jacks fairness.
4. Education- we lose education on the part of the plan they sever out of.
26
Intrinsic Perms Bad
1. Unpredictable- we can’t predict what they will add to their plan text, so we can’t
be prepared to debate it, meaning we will always lose. This is bad for fairness
and education.
2. Kills Neg Ground- they can use intrinsic perms to spike out of links or uniqueness
to our DA.
3. Fairness- they can get extra advantages outside the resolution that we will be
unprepared to defend against. Killing education and causing the neg to always
lose.
27
Neg Fiat Good
1. Reciprocal- the aff gets fiat so we should get to fiat.

2. Key to Neg ground- without neg fiat, it’s nearly impossible to produce
counterplans. Counterplans are key to fairness and education.
3. Real world- policy makers present alternative plans often.
4. Lit checks abuse- we can only fiat a counterplan if we can produce solvency
advocates and a net benefit.
Generics
28
Object Fiat Good
1. Checks aff unpredictability- we can’t predict their advantages. Object fiat checks
this and improves fairness.
2. Key to neg ground- allows the neg to produce offense against impacts such as
racism, rape, or dehumanization.
3. Net benefit checks abuse- we can only run an object counterplan if we can
produce a net benefit. This prevents unpredictability and infinite regression.
Generics
29
2NC CP’s Good
1. Education- allows us to read more arguments and go more in depth in the 1NC
and 2AC.
2. Time skews inevitable- the aff has 5 minutes to respond to the 13 minute negative
block.
3. Increase strategic thinking- forces the aff to pick their best arguments to read
against the counterplan since they have less time to respond to it.
4. Not infinitely regression- new arguments can only be read in the constructive
speeches, not the rebuttals.
Generics
30

Theory File Final

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Theory File Final

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Theory

AFFIRMATIVE THEORY BLOCKS.................................................................................2

1. Irresponsible negation- prevents coherent negation, justifies contradictions, and

1. Unpredictable- we can’t predict what time they’ll delay action to.

1. Tests of competition – they’re not advocacies, so we don’t open up more worlds.

1. Cross apply all the reasons PIC’s are bad.

1. Tests the resolution – Aff has to defend the USFG action.

1. Education- we learn more by debating the future and the present.

1. Reciprocal- the aff gets fiat so we should get to fiat.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai