FosterEnglish.com

A

A Priori: A priori is a claim that something is the most important issue in the debate round. An a priori issue is something that is resolved before the other issues in the debate and the team who resolves the a priori issue in their favor should win the debate round.

Advantage: The advantage(s) is(are) the beneficial result of the plan. They are usually different from the harms and have a larger impact. For example, The plan may lift the embargo against Cuba to alleviate the harm of suffering in Cuba, and claim the advantage of helping US farmers because now they could export their crops to Cuba and make more money. Note, the difference between a harm and an advantage is semantic; a harm could just have easily been labeled an advantage.

Affirmative: The team that is trying to support or prove the resolution true is the affirmative. The affirmative usually supports the resolution through a case that includes a plan of action.

Agent: The agent is who implements or carries out the plan such as Congress, the President, the Department of Defense or the Supreme Court. The resolution usually designates what agent the plan can use or from where the affirmative can draw an agent.

Alternative Causality: An argument that claims something has multiple causes and removing one cause will not alter or prevent a particular situation.

Attitudinal Inherency: Attitudinal Inherency refers to beliefs, prejudices or attitudes that prevent action being taken in the status quo to solve a problem.

B

Ballot: The ballot is the form the judge fills out to assign the win, speaker ranks and speaker points.

Block: A set of arguments that are prepared before a debate tournament. Blocks/Briefs contain both evidence and analysis that is written out.

Burden of Proof: The notion that the person, or team, who asserts a claim has the burden to prove that claim is true. For example, the affirmative has the burden to prove that the status quo is inadequate and needs to be changed.

C

Card: A card is a piece of evidence or a quote that is read to support an argument during a debate.

Clash: Clash consists of opposing arguments on a given issue. One of the fundamental goals of debate is to promote competing arguments on an issue. Good clash is when both teams take opposing views on the same issue.

Comparative Advantage: The claim that although the affirmative plan does not solve 100% of the harm area or advantage it is still better than the status quo. This argument is usually used by the affirmative if they are losing some of the solvency arguments the negative has presented.

Competition: Competition is a component of a counterplan. It is the part of the counterplan that shows how the counterplan is the best and only alternative to the plan. Competition has two parts mutual exclusivity and net benefits.

Conclusionary Evidence: An opinion or statement that is given without warrants or proof. It is usually a weak piece of evidence.

Constructive Speech: One of the first four speeches in a debate round in which the affirmative or negative establishes their fundamental positions and arguments. New arguments are allowed during the constructive speeches.

Counterplan: A negative offcase argument that is an alternative to the affirmative plan, that are designed to be more advantages than the affirmative plan. Counterplans are usually designed to solve all or most of the affirmative case while avoiding the disadvantages that link to the affirmative plan.

Critique: Usually a negative offcase argument that deals with the assumptions that a plan rests on, or on the discourse that is occurring, or not occurring, in the debate.

Cross-Apply: A phrase that is used to indicate to the judge and opposing team that they are using an argument that occurred somewhere else in the debate.

Cross-Examination: The three minute segment between constructive speeches in which questions are asked of the speaker.

D

Disadvantage: A Disad is a negative offcase argument that argues something negative will occur as a result of the affirmative's plan or advocacy. This argument relies on a causal chain of events, begun by the affirmative, that end in a bad impact. Hence, the affirmative would disadvantageous. The goal of the disadvantage is to have its impact outweigh the advantages of the affirmative.

Dropped Argument: An argument that is made by one team and not responded to by the opposing team.

E

Effects Topicality: A topicality argument that argues the affirmative plan is only topical as a result of the plan action. Hence, the plan itself is not topical, only the result of the plan is topical.

Evidence: Evidence is quotes, statistics etc. that are used to prove a claim.

Existential Inherency: Existential Inherency argues that simply because a problem exists it automatically means that inherency has to exist, even if it cannot be identified.

Extending: Furthering an argument in a debate round by answering the opponent's argument with evidence or analysis.

Extra Topicality: The plan mandates take actions that are above and beyond the resolution.

F

Fiat: This is an argument/term that assumes the plan actually passes. This is to prevent having to debate if the plan would pass through congress, and allow for debate about whether the plan should be adopted. Fiat does not allow the affirmative to claim that the plan solves, is popular, works, inexpensive or anything else. It only allows the affirmative to say that plan would be done.

Flow: A system of taking notes during the debate.

G

Ground: Ground refers to the field of arguments that each team has access to and the right to argue. The resolution sets up argumentative ground for what the affirmative and negative has to argue.

H

Harms: Harms are the negative consequences of the status quo that the affirmative is trying to solve. Harms are used to prove why the status quo must be changed.

I

Impact: The weight, importance, or relevance of an argument is known as the impact. The impact can also be considered to be the terminal end of a causal chain of events. For example, the negative might argue that the affirmative spends large amounts of money which in turn causes an economic downturn which leads to international conflict that results in nuclear war. The nuclear war is the terminal impact to that particular chain of events.

Inherency: The affirmative has the burden to prove that a problem exists before advocating the need for change. Inherency refers to the reason a problem exists. I.E. the affirmative must prove that the problem exists in the status quo because the affirmative plan doesn't exist.

L

Link: The link is the evidence, reasoning, or warrants that are used to connect two arguments or events. A link is usually associated as a component of a disadvantage.

M

Mandates: Mandates are the actions that the affirmative plan specifies are to be taken.

Mutually Exclusive: A component of competition in a counterplan. Mutual exclusivity refers to the argument that the counterplan and the plan cannot be adopted or coexist at the same time.

N

Negative: The negative is opposed to the resolution and/or the affirmative plan. The goal of the negative is to prove that the affirmative's plan is not advantageous.

Net Benefit: A component of competition in a counterplan. A counterplan is net beneficial when it is proven to be better than the plan alone or any combination of the plan and counterplan.

O

Offcase: Arguments that are run by the negative that do not deal specifically with the affirmative case structure, but rather to the effects of the affirmative case, the affirmative plan, or the resolution. Some common types of offcase arguments are: topicality, disadvantages, critiques, and counterplans.

Oncase: These are negative arguments designed to directly refute the 1AC. They are typically arguments that try to prove the plan doesn't solve the affirmative harms/advantages or that the plan actually makes them worse.

P

Permutation: A permutation is an affirmative answer to a counterplan. Generally, a permutation is a combination of the plan and the counterplan. The goal of a permutation is to prove the counterplan is not competitive.

Plan: What the affirmative proposes to do in order to solve the harms of the status quo. Most plans will advocate that some branch of the Federal Government should take an action to eliminate a harm. The more specific a plan is the better it is. The plan should also have a plan advocate.

Plan Advocate: A plan advocate is an author that says the affirmative plan is a good idea. It is best if the plan advocate is qualified and is discussing exactly what the affirmative does.

Plan Spike: A plan spike is a mandate is that is designed to eliminate a specific negative argument.

Presumption: This is an argument that states the status quo should be maintained until sufficient reasons have been proven to warrant the change desired by the affirmative. This does not mean that the status quo is necessarily good, only that we presume that it is good until it is proven otherwise.

R

Rebuttal: The last four speeches in a debate that are used to clarify, weigh, summarize and highlight arguments for the judge. New arguments are not allowed in the rebuttals however, new evidence that supports a previous argument or evidence previously read in the debate is.

Resolution: The statement that provides the parameters of the debate. It indicates what the affirmative is suppose to prove and what agent it is allowed to use. The affirmative is bound to operate within the context of the resolution. If the affirmative operates outside the resolution they are said to be not topical.

S

Scenario: Another term often used in place of the term advantage. It is also often used as an example of what would happen if the affirmative was not adopted.

Significance: Significance demonstrates how important an issue is. Usually significance is proven quantitatively or qualitatively.

Solvency: In order for the affirmative to say that the plan is a good idea they have to prove that the plan actually works and that it solves for the harms. Solvency is the part of the case where the affirmative proves that the plan accomplishes this goal.

Status Quo: Refers to the current policies or situations, as they exist without the affirmative. For example: the US embargo that is currently in place against Cuba is the status quo. If the affirmative advocated lifting the embargo it would be different than the status quo. So every time a team referred to the status quo, they would be referring to the world in which the embargo does exist.

Stock Issues: Stock issues are the issues that are common in most debates. Some people believe that stock issues are voting issues and that if an affirmative loses a stock issue they lose the debate. In policy debate the stock issues are topicality, significance, inherency, and solvency.

Structural Inherency: Structural Inherency means that something is preventing action from being taken in the status quo to solve a problem. These barriers can include laws and court decisions.

T

Topicality: Topicality is an argument that is used by the negative to show that the affirmative is not within the parameters of the resolution.

Turn: A turn occurs when a team takes an argument that was made against them and argues that the argument is actually beneficial. For example an affirmative plan claims the advantage of decreasing nuclear proliferation. A turn would be if the negative argued that in fact the plan increased proliferation.

U

Uniqueness: A uniqueness argument is most often thought of as a component of a disadvantage. It is the argument that without the affirmative plan the disadvantage would not occur.