1,166
edits
Difference between revisions of "Structure of a Shell"
→Norms Setting vs In-Round Abuse
| Line 125: | Line 125: | ||
Education – We take away educational benefits out of debate to use later in life which outweighs on real world usage. | Education – We take away educational benefits out of debate to use later in life which outweighs on real world usage. | ||
==== Norms Setting vs In-Round Abuse ==== | ==== Norms Setting vs In-Round Abuse ==== | ||
The distinction between norms setting and in-round abuse is a more technical part of the theory debate which is not brought up in most theory rounds, but it is worth mentioning here because it can still be very strategic in certain cases. | |||
The norm-setting model of theory argues that the purpose of theory debates are to set good norms across all rounds, whereas the in-round abuse model of theory argues that the purpose of theory is to mitigate abuse in this round, specifically. In debate, many judges and debaters seem to assume that theory operates under a norms setting model, but this is certainly up to contestation. | |||
The main relevance of the distinction is that under a norms-setting model, you are solely arguing over whether the interpretation is a good norm for the debate or not. All of the other aspects of the round become irrelevant. Under an in-rounds abuse model, in contrast, you are arguing whether the violation was abusive in the context of this round specifically. | |||
For example, suppose that the affirmative reads "Interpretation: Debaters must not read a Prioris." The negative stands up and replies "You responded to my a Priori, so there was no risk of it being abusive in this round." Clearly, this response would not be acceptable under a norm-setting model of debate, because the affirmative is arguing that the norm of reading a Prioris is bad, irrespective of whatever else happened in this round. | |||
Generally speaking, therefore, the person reading the theory shell will want to advocate for a norm-setting model of debate, and the person responding to theory might benefit from an in-round abuse model of debate. | |||
===== Common Arguments ===== | |||
IRA – Context: Abuse will always be contextual to different situations, so we can never have a unified understanding of a norm. View abuse through a case-by-case basis. | |||
IRA –Theory recourse: It justifies frivolous theory shells when I’ve not done anything abusive in this round specifically. Force them to prove why I was abusive in this round – anything else justifies a horrible norm for theory debates. | |||
IRA – Norms setting collapses as the purpose of norms setting is to mitigate in-round abuse just for all rounds | |||
IRA – Norms setting fails. A. Empirically disproven since tricks are still prevalent on the circuit – shows theory fails to enact real change B. Norms are controlled by judge preferences, not debaters, since not all debaters will run theory. C. Everyone has their own conception over what constitutes a good norm and is defensible | |||
Norms Setting – Longevity: setting the best norms for debate space ensures all rounds will be fair, not only this particular one, which outweighs. | |||
Norms Setting – Logic: the intrinsic purpose of theory is to set good norms; that is why we defend two different models through competing interps. | |||
Norms Setting – Collapses: defending a model of in round abuse concedes to the validity that it is a good norm and that norms setting matters | |||
Norms Setting – Models: theory is a question of models of debate, so even if you prove why your abuse isn’t significant here, if we win why it’s bad for the debate space as a whole, that justifies dropping them to stop the proliferation. | |||
== Paragraph Theory == | == Paragraph Theory == | ||
Theory shells are sometimes ran in the form of [[1AR Theory#Paragraph Theory|paragraph theory]]. While functionally identical to normal theory, paragraph theory often condenses the structure of a shell into one paragraph and makes it faster to run, especially useful for the 1AR. | Theory shells are sometimes ran in the form of [[1AR Theory#Paragraph Theory|paragraph theory]]. While functionally identical to normal theory, paragraph theory often condenses the structure of a shell into one paragraph and makes it faster to run, especially useful for the 1AR. | ||