Debate Terminology

Resolution - an arguable statement that establishes the subject and terms of the debate, the united states should adopt healthcare system

Resolutional - pertains to the resolution, a debater can criticize their opponent by saying their point is not resolution

Affirmative - the side of the debate in favor of the resolution, sometimes called the Pro or Aff

Negative - the side of the debate that disagrees the resolution, sometimes called the Con or Neg

Value - usually a word or phrase that establishes the parameter of the debate, Resolution: moes is better than chipotle, value: customer experience, flavor, bang for your buck, ethical food

Observation - an interpretation of the resolution that frames the debate in a way that helps the speaker, often will limit or narrow the scope or burden

Tabula Rasa - latin for blank slate, tab for short, leave as many preconceived notions as possible at home, judge the debate solely based on the arguments made by the debaters

Status quo/squo - the status quo is latin for the present system or current state of affairs, point of many debates is to challenge this or enact change

World - refers to broader context or implications of an argument essentially considering how a proposed policy or idea would impact the world at large not just a specific region situation, seek to show how their position affects something worldwide

Flow - notes in a debate, in an outline form, can move horizontally or vertically, paper and pencil or computer

Toulmin model - main components, claim, grounds, warrant

Claim - an argument made about a topic or resolution similar to a thesis

Grounds - evidence used to support claim, WWII followed a worldwide economic decline

Warrant - the connection between the grounds and the claim

Crossfire - Questioning periods during the debate, can follow each of the constructive speeches and the rebuttal speeches, helps each side gather more info to use in rebuttals, ask clarifying questions

Signposting - markers to help organize a speech for an audience, can be numbered lists, contention one two three, can be transition words

Contention - constructive speeches are often organized into contentions or major arguments that support the claim, most speeches have 2-3 contentions

Rebuttal - teams must rebut the arguments made by the other teams in the constructive speeches, offer a different point of view not necessarily trying to prove it wrong with any evidence

Refutation - produce evidence to prove an argument is untrue, four step process - signal-identify claim u are answering, state-make your counterclaim, support- offer evidence, summarize explain importance of argument

Embedded Refutation - an advanced technique that is used in rebuttals where a team incorporates a reference to the other side’s argument when answering, acknowledges counterargument in same sentence one refutes it

Prep time- amount of time in a debate u and partner have to prepare speeches, standard time is two minutes

Canned- a speech is prepared entirely before the start of the debate, constructive speeches are often canned

Card - a quote that teams read in a debate, citation (source) + date, debaters used to bring their quotes to tournaments on index cards

A priori- argument based on logic and reasoning alone no evidence or experience to prove true or false

Clash - directly engaging and refuting an opponent’s argument, a good clash identifies a specific area where both sides differ needs evidence to support claim

Top heavy - debaters spend a lot of time giving an overview for their arguments and strongly answering the first few arguments that their opposition makes

Drop - argument that is not responded to by your opponent in his or her next speech

Kick - eliminating an argument, if it's confusing, irrelevant, messy

Extend - keeping the argument alive in later speeches rather than kicking it

Spread - to talk as quickly as possible, discouraged in debate

Advocate - supporting something with an argument to argue for something to occur

RFD/REASON FOR DECISION - judges reason for decision in the debate, must be based on arguments made in the round

Judge Paradigm - criteria that the judge uses to evaluate the debate, statement that explains their beliefs and how they will judge a debate round

Framework - the judge thinks about how to evaluate the debate, what is the most important issue, standards, common frameworks - human rights, national security, cost benefit analysis