debate

Social construct theory

A philosophic ideal that addresses the origin of society, and provides a groundwork for the legitimacy and extent of governmental power.

social construct theory STRENGTHS

\-instills a sense of civic duty among the individual in relation to society as a whole

\-creates a sense of community instead of isolated instances of individuals under a single government or ruler

\- it establishes basic, inalienable rules.

social construct theory WEAKNESSES

\-It gives the government too much power to make laws under the guise of protecting the public

\- Political authority cannot simply evolve or emerge from its parts.

utilitarianism

generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good.

utilitarianism STRENGTHS

* emphasis on neutrality,
* its ability to capture what fundamentally matters
* Flexibility. It can be applied to any moral situation that requires guidance

utilitarianism WEAKNESSES

\-society does not solely focus on happiness when making choices

\-Outcomes are unpredictable when dealing with the future

\-gives the wrong answers to moral questions.

deontology

views actions as either right or wrong without any regard to contextual features.

deontology STRENGTHS

\-doesn't require weighing the costs and benefits of a situation

\-does not require a prediction of an actions consequence

\-avoids subjectivity and uncertainty

deontology WEAKNESSES

\-No consequences are considered

\-motivated by pleasure

\-No flexibility.

consequentialism

The morality of an action is to be judged solely by its consequences.

consequentialism STRENGTHS

\-usefulness for practical application

\-the relative ease of universal application

\-provides clear and practical guidance.

consequentialism WEAKNESSES

\-the intentions of the person doing the act are irrelevant

\-no one can know the future with certainty

\-the character of the person doing the act is irrelevant.

Value Criterion/Standard

a metric by which impacts in the round are viewed and analyzed. Most often, these are rooted in philosophy and explains how a government or person should act, and why.

Rebuttal

a specific time in each debate designated for either side to refute the arguments made by their opponent.

Warrant

a reason why a claim is true. Can be analytical or evidence based.

False Dilemma

a logical fallacy that presents only two options or sides when there are many options or sides

framework

a structured and formalized argument with rationale, analysis, and evidence explaining how the judge should weigh various arguments.

stock issues

significance, harms, inherency, topicality, and solvency are some. most debate circuits do not debate using this style anymore, and topicality and solvency are the only ones typically seen in all circuits.

impact

the reason why the argument matters/is important. explains why the judge should be concerned with an issue.

slippery slope

a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that is will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends.

contention

a pre-written argument that supports the debaters’ side of the resolution, these are part of the case.

ad hominem

attack an opponent’s character or motives rather than answering the argument or claim

bandwagon

a fallacy based on the assumption that the opinion of the majority is always valid

resolution

the subject of the debate

strawman argument

logical fallacy of distorting an opposing position into an extreme version of itself and then arguing against the extreme version