1,166
edits
Difference between revisions of "Theory"
m
→Topicality
m (→Topicality) |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Although theory was originally intended to check back against legitimate abusive practices in-round, some debaters read theory arguments against practices that are not very abusive in the form of [[Frivolous Theory|frivolous theory]]. Strategically, frivolous theory can be smart when theory is evaluated under an [[Introduction to Circuit Debate#Offense vs Defense|offense-defense paradigm]]. If your opponent wins that you are being even the tiniest bit abusive or that you aren't doing something that could make the round more fair, your opponent could win the round. | Although theory was originally intended to check back against legitimate abusive practices in-round, some debaters read theory arguments against practices that are not very abusive in the form of [[Frivolous Theory|frivolous theory]]. Strategically, frivolous theory can be smart when theory is evaluated under an [[Introduction to Circuit Debate#Offense vs Defense|offense-defense paradigm]]. If your opponent wins that you are being even the tiniest bit abusive or that you aren't doing something that could make the round more fair, your opponent could win the round. | ||
== Topicality == | == Topicality == | ||
[[Topicality]] is a type of theory argument that proves the affirmative is not correctly defending the resolution. If the affirmative reads a [[Policy#Policy ACs| | [[Topicality]] is a type of theory argument that proves the affirmative is not correctly defending the resolution. If the affirmative reads a [[Policy#Policy ACs|plan]], the negative might read a topicality shell to prove both that it's unfair for the affirmative to not defend the entire resolution as stated and also that doing so is not consistent with the grammar of the resolution. | ||