110 likes | 224 Views
DISADVANTAGES. What is a Disadvantage?. Disadvantages are offcase positions that the negative advances to prove that the costs of the plan outweigh its benefits Disads typically make a CAUSAL claim: Plan -> X -> Y -> Bad
E N D
What is a Disadvantage? • Disadvantages are offcase positions that the negative advances to prove that the costs of the plan outweigh its benefits • Disads typically make a CAUSAL claim: Plan -> X -> Y -> Bad • Disads must outweigh the “residual case” to be a reason to vote negative—you can “win” a disad and still lose the debate • Disads are often named after either the “link” or “impact” (Troop Shift, Heg, etc.)
Structure of a Disadvantage • Disads have three main components • External link: argument (card) that connects the affirmative plan (or its effects) to the disadvantage • Internal link(s): arguments (cards) that connect the external link claim to the impact—can have multiple internal links • Impact: negative effect produced by the plan… in contemporary debate, only 3 impacts ‘count’ • Global nuclear war • Extinction • “No Value to Life”
Structure [cont’d] • Each of these three components also includes AT LEAST an implicit uniqueness claim—an argument that either the causal connection (link) or consequence (impact) is not occurring in the status quo • Some folks also talk about “threshold” and “brink”—the amount of ‘push’ we need to trigger a causal chain/how close we are to triggering that chain
Why Use Disadvantages? • Disads reward hard work—they are an argument on which “being prepared” (having new uniqueness stories and updated blocks) can earn you wins • Disads provide a lot of argument diversity—even if the range of disads on a particular topic is narrow (see: last year), they can be tweaked in a nearly infinite number of ways • Disads are generally pretty intuitive, EXCEPT for the terminal impact. Just sayin’. • Disads can interact with the case impact, and TURN IT
One Important Thing to Remember • All disadvantages are LIES—if they were true, we would all be dead. Be HAPPY about this—life is beautiful! • This should not bother you—debate is about testing ideas in a competitive format, and if the aff cannot defeat a bad argument, that’s on them—just think, you’re helping them learn • “Truthyness” on a disad is most important at the level of the external link—if you’re good on the link everything else can fall into place
How to Answer a Disadvantage • Have a STRATEGY for defeating the disad—you have three basic options • Link turn • Impact turn • Straight mitigation • Both link and impact turn strategies should include mitigation arguments EXCEPT under very specific circumstances
Link Turns • A “link turn” denies one or more of the causal connections in the disadvantage, arguing that the causal connection works in the OPPOSITE direction • Example: link says plan decreases hegemony, link turn says plan increases hegemony • A “link turn” is no better than a takeout UNLESS it is combined with a “link uniqueness” claim
Impact Turns • Impact turns claim that the “bad” of the disadvantage impact is actually “good” • Example: disad says plan causes nuclear war, and nuclear war is bad—impact turn says nuclear war is good! • Many people call lower-level internal link turns “impact turns”—this is not entirely accurate, but is a widely accepted naming practice • Example: Disad says plan decreases hegemony, hegemony is good—impact turns says hegemony is bad (which is true, btw) • Disads can be “straight turned”—either reading ONLY unique link turns or impact turns (NOT BOTH!!!!), forcing the other team to go for the argument
Mitigation Arguments • Link (both External and Internal) • Link is not true • Link is exaggerated • Link is non-unique • Impact • Impact is not true • Impact is exaggerated • Impact is non-unique • All causal claims can have their thresholds/brinks attacked
Strategic Considerations for Disads • Number: you want to put pressure on the aff, but you do not want to either spread yourself out or contradict yourself—generally, 2-4 disads are plenty, and if you’re relatively inexperienced, fewer is better than more • Case: disads MUST be accompanied by case takeouts and/or “turns the case” claims—it is almost impossible for you to win otherwise • Impacts: should be diverse, able to turn the case, and able to OUTWEIGH the case—a disad that does not outweigh the aff is pretty much worthless • Types: disads should only minimally interact with one another—otherwise, you can run into dangerous cross-applications… avoid duplication in link and impact claims • Disads + Counterplans = Peanut Butter + Jelly: good alone, excellent in combination