Theory File Final

8/14/2019 Theory File Final

1/30

TheoryAFFIRMATIVE THEORY BLOCKS .................................................................................2

Dispo/Condi Bad ..............................................................................................................3

PICs Bad .........................................................................................................................450 State Fiat Bad ..............................................................................................................5

International Fiat Bad .....................................................................................................6

Agent Counterplans Bad .................................................................................................7

Delay CPs Bad ................................................................................................................8Severance Perms Good ....................................................................................................9

Intrinsic Perms Good .....................................................................................................10

Multiple Perms Good ....................................................................................................11....................................................................................................................................... 11

Neg Fiat Bad ..................................................................................................................12Object Fiat Bad ..............................................................................................................132NC CPs Bad ................................................................................................................14

Floating PICs Bad .........................................................................................................15

No Text to the Alternative Bad ......................................................................................16

NEGATIVE THEORY BLOCKS ...................................................................................... 17Condi Good ....................................................................................................................18

Dispo Good ...................................................................................................................19

PICs Good .....................................................................................................................2050 State Fiat Good .........................................................................................................21

International Fiat Good .................................................................................................22

Agent Counterplans Good. ............................................................................................23Delay CPs Good ............................................................................................................24

Multiple Perms Bad .......................................................................................................25

Severance Perms Bad .....................................................................................................26Intrinsic Perms Bad ........................................................................................................27

Neg Fiat Good ................................................................................................................28

Object Fiat Good ............................................................................................................29

2NC CPs Good ..............................................................................................................30

1


2/30

AFFIRMATIVE THEORY BLOCKS

2


3/30

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 theycan just go for the one we undercovered, making the aff rebuttals unfairly difficult

and rendering part of our speeches moot.

3. Multiple possible worlds bada. Forces judge intervention

b. Isnt reciprocal- we get one world, they shouldnt get two

c. Hurts the quality of policy comparison of prevents in-depth debate andeducation 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 cant straight turn a policy to kill it.

6. Inconsistent advocacies - kills clash and education by allowing them to duck outof a failed cp

7. Dispo is Condi in disguise (Dispo bad only) -they can force us to go for the permby 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


4/30

PICs 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 debate3. Forces the aff to debate against themselves - makes it difficult for us to generate

offense which destroys fairness.

4. Justifies vague plan texts - PICs give incentive to write vague plan texts. Thiskills real world education because we dont 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 - DAs test the comparative necessity of the plan. The

CP isnt necessary.

7. Voter for fairness and education

4


5/30

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 toresearch 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 shouldnt get 50 actors for reasons

of fairness.

5. Infinitely regressive - If 50 states can pass the same plan, whats to stop the negfrom a cp that has all countries commit to world peace. They justify unfair

multiple actor advantage cps, which are illegit.

6. Lose aff ground - difficult to get offensive args against all 50 states acting at thesame time.

7. Predictability - they can claim advantages off of one of the 50 states acting and wecant predict which state or what.


5


6/30

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

cant predict whatever theyre 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 cant predict what the neg will say because they have so muchto 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. (intl actions not in your jurisdiction)6. Voter for fairness and education.

6


7/30

Agent Counterplans Bad

1. Not reciprocal the Neg can take any USFG agent they want were bound to

the USFG as a whole.

2. Forces aff to debate against itself neg steals all our offense and arguing againstcounterplan is arguing against plan.

3. Unpredictable - allows the neg to choose any part of the USFG, its too big to

research all the possible agents.4. Kills topic specific education we dont talk about the actual impacts of energy

policy, we only talk about the process in the USFG

5. Not key to education/ground - DAs test the comparative necessity of the plan.The CP is not necessary.

6. Voter for fairness and education.

7


8/30

Delay CPs Bad

1. Unpredictable - we cant predict what time theyll delay action to.

2. Unfair research burden - its difficult to research the future because the future is

uncertain.3. Kills Aff ground - its difficult to produce offense against the uncertain future.

4. Education - we dont 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. Voter for fairness and education .

8


9/30

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 trainsus 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 shouldnt be voted down for a bad perm.

9


10/30

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 ofdebate 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 shouldnt be voted down for a bad perm.

10


11/30

Multiple Perms Good

1. Tests of competition theyre not advocacies, so we dont 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 anadvocacy, so we shouldnt be voted down.

11


12/30

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 whichskews ground unfairly.

3. Predictability - we cant predict what they will fiat.

4. Infinite regression - there are an infinite number of things they could fiat. Thisexplodes 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 forfiat. Should gives the aff a normative basis for fiat.

7. Not key to ground/education - DAs test the comparative necessity of the plan.

The CP isnt necessary.8. Voter for fairness and education .

12


13/30

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 harmswe 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 theelimination of racism.


13


14/30

2NC CPs 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 cant read the plan in the 2AC, the neg shouldnt be

allowed to read a counterplan in the 2NC.

3. Infinite regression - 2NC counterplans justify 2NR counterplans which destroyeducation because we cant go in-depth.

4. In depth education - we have less time to respond, meaning we cant go as in depth

into the argument.5. Voter for fairness and education .

14


15/30

Floating PICs Bad

1. Cross apply all the reasons PICs 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 - its difficult to get offense against a word or representation we

made.

4. Irresponsible argumentation and shifting advocacies - floating PICs have the negshift to supporting the plan and then rejecting the plan, which creates

irresponsibility and kills education and fairness.


15


16/30

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


17/30

NEGATIVE THEORY BLOCKS

17


18/30

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.

GenericsChecks 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 planSearch for the best policy- we use the arg to find the best policyNo voter- reject the arg not the team.

18


19/30

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 cps like we kick DAs 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 extremedeparture 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 thecounterplan, improving education.

8. Real world - policy makers change their minds all the time if they see an option is not as

good.

GenericsChecks Aff bias- aff gets infinite prep, first and last speeches, and lit biasNegation 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 policyNo voter- reject the arg not the team.

19


20/30

PICs 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 CPs are PICs. Rejecting these destroys fairness andeducation by reducing the number of neg options.

4. Net benefit and solvency checks abuse - PICs are grounded in the literature which

limits what we can PIC out of.5. We dont steal aff ground - aff can easily produce a solvency deficit for whatever

is changed in the plan text.

Generics

Checks Aff bias- aff gets infinite prep, first and last speeches, and lit biasNegation theory- we are fulfilling our job which is to reject the planSearch for the best policy- we use the arg to find the best policy

No voter- reject the arg not the team.

20


21/30

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

incentives3. 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 nationallevel.

5. Real world impossible - debate is not real world. Fiat doesnt 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 states8. 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

Checks Aff bias- aff gets infinite prep, first and last speeches, and lit biasNegation theory- we are fulfilling our job which is to reject the plan


21


22/30

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 its 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

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 planSearch for the best policy- we use the arg to find the best policy


22


23/30

Agent Counterplans Good.

1. Checks aff bias aff gets first and last speech and infinite prep.

2. Negation theory negs burden is to prove aff wrong

3. Best policy option the flaw in the plan leads us to try and get the best policyoption 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 themjustify 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 didnt.

8. Perms check they can claim the same benefits as we do.

23


24/30

Delay CPs 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 thedelay CP.


Negation theory- we are fulfilling our job which is to reject the plan


24


25/30

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, thats 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 itsunpredictable 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 dont 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


26/30

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 DAs and netbenefit, which is illegit.

3. Unpredictable : we cant 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


27/30

Intrinsic Perms Bad

1. Unpredictable - we cant predict what they will add to their plan text, so we cant

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 beunprepared to defend against. Killing education and causing the neg to always

lose.


27


28/30

Neg Fiat Good

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

2. Key to Neg ground - without neg fiat, its nearly impossible to producecounterplans. 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.




28


29/30

Object Fiat Good

1. Checks aff unpredictability - we cant 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.




29


30/30

2NC CPs 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 negativeblock.

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

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 planSearch for the best policy- we use the arg to find the best policy


Documents

Theory File Final