Transcript RubaieTopicality - 1-25

OUTLINE
1. WHAT is topicality?
2. WHY does topicality matter?
3. HOW is topicality debated and WHEN should I read it?
4. HOW is topicality answered?
5. HOW do judges determine the winner of a Topicality debate?
WHAT IS TOPICALITY?
Topicality is the practice
of defining and
interpreting the words
in the resolution
WHAT IS TOPICALITY?
This year’s resolution:
Resolved: The United States Federal
Government should substantially decrease its
military and/or police presence in one or more
of the following: Afghanistan, Iraq, Japan,
Kuwait, Turkey and/or South Korea.
WHAT IS TOPICALITY?
Topicality is structured in 4 parts –
A. Interpretation – our interpretation of (the word in the
resolution) is that it means (whatever you think it
means). This is supported by (the definition) .
Definitions are found in dictionaries, policy analysis and
legislation.
WHAT IS TOPICALITY?
B. Violation – The reason the Affirmative doesn’t meet
your interpretation.
Examples –
*’Substantially reduce’– A substantial reduction is 90% - the plan leaves more than 10% of troops.
*Military and police presence – The plan removes bases,
not troops, and troops are military presence.
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
“Limited agreement is the starting condition
of contest and debate. There can be no
argument except…within a context of
agreement. Contest is meaningless if there
is a lack of agreement about what is being
contested. Debaters must have some
shared ideas about the terms of their
disagreements.” – Shively
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
C. Standards and Voting Issues – Standards
represent WHY topicality matters. A few
standards/voting issues are particularly popular;
1. Predictability – their Aff is based on an
unpredictable understanding of the resolution.
Without being able to predict the Aff, we can’t
research or prepare. Debates without research or
preparation are less educational and fair.
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
2. Ground – since their affirmative isn’t based on the
resolution, we lose the ability to read our best
arguments. This hurts equity because they artificially
claim the best ground for themselves and exclude our
best arguments.
3. Education – their interpretation of the topic removes
debates about the most relevant and valuable parts of
the topic. We do debate to learn, which means this is
the greatest offense imaginable.
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
4. Fairness (also known as competitive equity) – Their
interpretation would allow the Aff to do anything and
the Neg very little to say in response. The topic is
supposed to evenly and fairly divide ground.
5. Limits – our interpretation sets a clear, reasonable
limit for what is and isn’t topical. Limits are good
because they ensure predictable, fair ground for both
sides.
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
6. EXTRA Topicality – the affirmative does things
BEYOND the resolution, which are unpredictable and
unfair. Example: they add a tax to fund the plan.
7. EFFECTS Topicality – although the EFFECT of the plan
would be a reduction in military presence, its
immediate action isn’t topical. Example: Banning the
military would result in a removal of military presence.
WHY DOES TOPICALITY MATTER?
The most important reason …
A judge’s jurisdiction is to affirm or reject the
resolution. It is an affirmative burden to be
prove the resolution true. If the Affirmative
isn’t topical, it isn’t within a judge’s jurisdiction
to vote on and the Aff loses.
HOW IS TOPICALITY RUN?
It is run as an ‘off case’ position in the 1NC. It looks like
A. Interpretation – substantial means 90% <insert
evidence for definition>
B. Violation – they only reduce 50% of U.S. military
presence.
C. Standards –
1. Ground
2. Education, etc
WHEN SHOULD I READ TOPICALITY?
1. When an affirmative is cheating or you think they
might cheat – examples: “Our affirmative is too small
to trigger the link,” “Our affirmative doesn’t effect
troops which means it isn’t controversial,” etc.
2. When the rest of your strategy is inefficient –
topicality isn’t a mean accusation; it’s a tool in an
arsenal of arguments.
WHEN SHOULD I READ TOPICALITY?
3. When you want a Plan B – sometimes things don’t work
out. Having a backup argument that you could win the
debate on alone is incredibly helpful.
4. When you want to put time pressure on the 2AC – topicality
can be very confusing, and takes time to understand and
answer.
Remember – Topicality is a no-risk option. If an Aff proves
they’re topical, it only proves they’ve met their burden, not
that the plan is a good idea.
HOW IS TOPICALITY ANSWERED?
The 2AC is commonly structured to make the four
following arguments –
1. “We meet” – our affirmative is an example of their
interpretation, not a violation of it.
Examples: We actually do remove 90% of presence, we
do remove the bases as well, etc.
HOW IS TOPICALITY ANSWERED?
2. Counter-interpretation – instead of interpreting the
word to mean X, we should interpret it to mean why.
Examples: Substantial is 50%, not 90%.
Military presence is just troops, not bases.
HOW IS TOPICALITY ANSWERED?
3. Our interpretation is better than their’s – it creates
better ground, it’s more fair, it’s more educational, etc.
Common comparisons include – They over-limit the topic,
learning about more issues is better, they only focus
on negative ground and not affirmative ground, etc.
HOW IS TOPICALITY ANSWERED?
4. Their argument isn’t a reason to reject us –
A. Potential abuse isn’t a voter – even if we could’ve cheated,
we didn’t. We shouldn’t be punished for what we didn’t do.
B. We’re reasonably topical – even if we don’t meet the BEST
interpretation, we meet a good one, and good is good
enough. Topicality is an all-or-nothing issue, meaning we
should be very careful before excluding an entire area from
the topic.
HOW DO JUDGES DETERMINE THE WINNER?
The classic decision is made between competing
interpretations and reasonability.
Competing interpretations means that the judge looks at
the reasons to prefer the Neg’s interpretation and the
reasons to prefer the Aff’s interpretation and
determines which is best.
Why is this good? It’s the most objective way to
determine Topicality.
HOW DO JUDGES DETERMINE THE WINNER?
Reasonability has two common meanings;
The more common, but less effective version, amounts to
“good is good enough.” This means that if the Aff is
reasonably topical, they should win.
The less well-known but more developed version is that it
would be unreasonable to exclude good literature.