User:Hnedrfrieowjiahfguh/List of debate terms

This is a list of terms in competitive debate, including Policy debate (CX), Lincoln-Douglas debate (LD), Public forum debate (PF), Congressional debate (CD) and Karl Popper debate (KP).

Advantage

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An advantage is any part of the  that demonstrates the benefits of the affirmative's  or of the  case about the benefits of the negative's plan. See also.

Ambiguity

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Ambiguity occurs when a word in an argument has two or more possible meanings and the listener has no means to determine which is intended. See also.

Analogy

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that supports associations between things based on their similarity or dissimilarity.

Appeal to fear

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that occurs when an arguer uses irrelevant appeals to fear to take the focus off the arguer’s original argument.

Appeal to popularity

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that occurs when a debater uses the popularity of a person, product, or belief to justify a favorable conclusion about that person, product, or belief.

Appeal to tradition

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument made when a debater argues in favor of a particular action on the grounds of tradition rather than on the basis of that action’s merits.

Argument

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A claim supported by a warrant with some impact. The standards of a logically good argument include acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency. See also Standard of acceptability, Standard of relevance, standard of sufficiency.

Argument ad hominem

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacy that occurs when an arguer attacks a person’s character or background, which is irrelevant to the claim.

Argument by example

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that supports an association between specific examples and a general rule.

Argument by incompatibility

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument designed to reject something because it is incompatible with something else.

Argument by principle

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that supports a certain action based on the connection between that action and a general principle.

Argument sphere

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A community within which arguments are made.

Argument structure

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The way evidence and warrants are arranged to support a claim. See also Convergent argument structure; Independent argument structure; Simple argument structure.

Argumentation

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The uniquely human use of reasoning to communicate.

Arrangement

 * Used in debate formats: KP

The organization of arguments in a speech.

Authority

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that supports a claim with the opinion of experts in the field.

Ballot

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A document on which the judge records the decision, the reasons for the decision, and speaker points awarded to each debater.

Begging the question

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacy of acceptability that occurs when a debater introduces evidence that is the same as the claim.

Case

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

One or more arguments sufficient to support a proposition.

Causal argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that supports associations between causes and effects. See also Contributory causal argument; Intervening and counteracting causal argument; Necessary causal argument; Sufficient causal argument.

Cause-and-effect proposition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A proposition that asserts that one object causes a specific outcome.

Cause-and-effect reasoning

 * Used in debate formats: KP

The type of reasoning that examines the reasons certain actions, events, or conditions (causes) create specific consequences (effects).

Claim

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A controversial statement an arguer supports using reason. Claims are divided into four general categories: definitional descriptive, relational, and evaluative.

Comparative advantages case

 * Used in debate formats: CX, KP

A method used for developing a case about policies that advocates the adoption of the plan based on its advantages compared with the status quo or some other policy.

Comparative policy proposition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Compares two or more policies.

Comparative value proposition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Compares two or more objects with respect to some value.

Constructive speech

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A speech that presents a debater’s basic arguments for or against the resolution.

Contributory causal argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that states that the purported cause is one of several contributors to the effect.

Convergent argument structure

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Two or more bits of evidence that, in combination with one another, support a claim.

Counterplan

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD (circuit), KP

A plan proposed by the negative team as an alternative to the affirmative plan.

Cross-examination

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A period during the debate when a member of one team asks questions of a member of the opposing team.

Criterion
See.

Debate

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The process of arguing about claims in situations where an adjudicator must decide the outcome.

Dissociation

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that creates new categories by dividing an old category into two new ones.

Equivocation

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Equivocation is a that occurs when an argument uses two meanings of a word as if they were the same.

Evidence

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Different types of information (facts, statistics, theories, opinions, or narratives) that are used to support arguments. Evidence can be divided into two categories: that relating to reality (facts, theories, and presumptions) and that relating to preference (values, value hierarchies, and value categories). See also Facts; Presumption; Theory; Value; Value categories; Value hierarchy.

Facts

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Observed or observable data.

Fallacy

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that fails to meet any one of the standards of acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency. See also Argument ad hominem; Ambiguity; Appeal to fear; Appeal to popularity; Appeal to tradition; Begging the question; Equivocation; Fallacy of composition; Fallacy of division; Fallacy of incompatibility; Faulty analogy; Hasty conclusion; Improper appeal to practice; Loaded term; Poisoning the well; Post hoc fallacy; Problematic premise; Red herring; Slippery slope argument; Straw person fallacy; Two wrongs fallacy; Vagueness.

Fallacy of composition

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument where the evidence is drawn from some part of a whole but the conclusion is about the whole.

Fallacy of division

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An erroneous argument where the evidence is drawn from the whole, but the conclusion is made about the part.

Fallacy of incompatibility

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Occurs when a debater makes a statement as evidence that is at odds with another statement made by the debater, or when a debater’s argument is incompatible with some action she has performed or recommended elsewhere.

Faulty analogy

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that occurs when two cases are compared with each other but are not similar in terms of the relationship stated in the comparison.

Guilt by association

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that occurs when a person’s argument is attacked using that person’s association with groups and people rather than using issues pertinent to the argument.

Hasty conclusion

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that fails to meet the standard of sufficiency. It includes hasty generalization, irrelevant slippery slope arguments, fallacy of composition, fallacy of division, faulty analogy, improper appeal to practice, post hoc fallacy, and two wrongs.

Hasty generalization

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacy of reasoning by example that occurs when the examples selected to support the claim are either insufficient in number or in their representativeness. Improper appeal to practice A fallacious argument that occurs when a debater suggests doing something because it is a common practice, even if that practice clearly is wrong.

Independent argument structure

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Several pieces of evidence, any one of which can provide sufficient support for a claim.

International debating
Debating that occurs between representatives of different countries, nations, or cultures.

Intervening and counteracting causal argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that demonstrates a cause that prevents the completion of a cause-and-effect sequence.

Irrelevant reason

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that fails to meet the relevance criterion. It includes ad hominem argument, appeal to fear, appeal to popularity, appeal to tradition, guilt by association, poisoning the well, red herring, and straw person.

Judge

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An observer of a debate who has the responsibility of deciding which team has done a better job of debating.

Karl Popper debate

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A debate format that matches two three-person teams against each other: one affirming the proposition and one opposing it. Each team has one constructive speech presenting its basic arguments for and against the proposition and two constructive speeches refuting the opposing team’s arguments and summarizing its own.

Lincoln-Douglas debate

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD

Lincoln-Douglas debate is a

Loaded term

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacy of language that occurs when the arguer labels something with a word that includes an evaluation and that evaluation plays a role in supporting the conclusion.

Method of agreement

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines more than one case where two elements are simultaneously present, concluding that one is the cause of the other.

Method of correlation

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines examples that demonstrate that as the amount of the cause increases (or decreases), the effect will also increase (or decrease).

Method of difference

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A method of reasoning used in cause-and-effect analysis that examines examples wherein both the purported cause and the purported effect are absent, concluding that one is the cause of the other.

Minor repair

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD (circuit), KP

A strategy the negative uses to defend the present system with minor changes.

Necessary causal argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that states that without the suspected cause, the effect cannot occur, thus the cause is necessary to produce the effect.

Need

 * Used in debate formats: KP

The part of the affirmative case about policies that identifies a certain problem in the status quo that the existing system cannot solve.

Need-plan-benefit case

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A method used for developing a case about policies that involves the identification of a need, proposal of a plan, and a demonstration of the advantages of the plan.

Nonunique

 * Used in debate formats: PF, LD, CX

If an impact is "nonunique", then it occurs whether or not we do the plan, and so isn't evidence for or against the plan.

Plan

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD (circuit), KP

A course of action proposed by the affirmative when debating a proposition of policy that proposes to solve the problems identified in the “need.”

Permutation

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD (circuit)

A permutation (also known as a perm) occurs if it is possible to do some plan proposed by one side and another plan proposed by the opposite side. Thus, the impacts of the plan is.

Performative contradiction

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD (circuit)

A Performative contradiction (also perfcon) occurs in which a team does something which violates their kritik. A perfcon occurs when the kritik contradicts with the kritiking team's counterplan, disads, case debate, topicality, theory, or behavior (eg, using a laptop while kritiking technology). Perfcons are attacked as:
 * 1) Unfair for the other team, who only has one world
 * 2) Proof that the kritiking team links harder into the kritik than the non-kritiking team
 * 3) Preventing the solvency of the kritik

Poisoning the well

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that attempts to discredit a person or a source in advance of that person’s argument.

Post hoc fallacy

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Occurs when a debater assumes that because one thing predates another, the first must have caused the second.

Preparation time

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The time allotted to each team for preparation during the debate (eight minutes in Karl Popper debate).

Presumption

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD


 * Used in debate formats: KP

The assumption that current policies will be maintained until someone makes a case that another policy is a better option.

Presumption (evidence)
A statement concerning what people ordinarily expect to happen in the course of normal events.

Problematic premise

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that fails to meet the acceptability criterion. It includes begging the question and the fallacy of incompatibility.

Proposition

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A final claim made by a debater and supported by a combination of claims.

Proposition of definition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Asserts that a certain definition should be applied to a certain category of things.

Proposition of description

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Asserts a proper way to describe an object or a number of objects.

Proposition of evaluation

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Attaches a value to any object.

Proposition of relationship

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Assert a certain relationship between objects.

Proposition of similarity

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Asserts that two objects are similar to each other.

Reasoning

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The process used to connect evidence to the claim. See also warrant.

Rebuttal

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The speeches in the debate that challenge and defend arguments introduced in the constructive speeches.

Red herring

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacious argument that shifts the focus from the original argument.

Refutation

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The process of attacking arguments.

Research

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The process of locating and selecting evidence in preparation for debate.

Reservation

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An exception made to a claim. A reservation usually involves a situation in which the arguer does not wish to maintain the claim.

Simple argument structure

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A single claim leading from a single piece of evidence following along a single warrant.

Simple policy proposition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A proposition that urges adoption of a certain policy.

Simple value proposition

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Attaches a value to a single object.

Slippery slope argument

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

An argument that connects a series of events in a causal chain that ultimately leads to disaster or calamity. Slippery slope arguments are fallacies if the series of events is improperly connected.

Standard of acceptability

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Determines whether the evidence is acceptable to those who judge the argument.

Standard
See.

Standard of relevance

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Determines whether the evidence is relevant to the claim it supports.

Standard of sufficiency

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Determines whether all of the evidence taken as a whole is sufficient to support the claim.

Standards of a logically good argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

Standards are acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency.

Stasis

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A system devised to determine the key issues of clash in a topic. These key issues can be used to develop a system of research.

Status quo

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The status quo (also SQUO) The course of action currently pursued (i.e., the present system).

Strawman

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Occurs when an arguer, intentionally or unintentionally, misinterprets an opponent’s argument, then proceeds to refute the misinterpreted argument as if it were the opponent’s actual argument.

Style

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

The use of language, voice, and body language used by a debater.

Sufficient causal argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An argument that states that the presence of a cause virtually guarantees (is sufficient for) the presence of the effect.

Theory

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A statement that explains other facts or that predicts the occurrence of events.


 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD

Theory describes arguments about what debate should be, rather than the specific.

Tournament of Champions

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF

The Tournament of Champions (also TOC) is a yearly tournament hosted by the University of Kentucky. The TOC is essentially the nationals tournament of the and is the most highly regarded tournament in American high school debate. Entrance requires at least 2 s.

Toulmin model of argument

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A model of argument developed by philosopher Stephen Toulmin. The basic model includes evidence, warrant, claim, and reservation.

Two wrongs fallacy

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Occurs when a debater makes an argument urging the audience to accept, or condone, one thing that is wrong because another similar thing, also wrong, has been accepted and condoned.

Vagueness

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

A fallacy of language that occurs when the meaning of some word or words in an argument is indeterminate and when such vagueness prevents listeners from assessing the argument.

Value

 * Used in debate formats: LD

The value (also value premise) is the standard by which the round should be judged and is some inherent good. See also:.


 * Used in debate formats: KP

Evidence based on the audience’s preferred value.

Value case

 * Used in debate formats: KP

A case supporting a proposition of value. Three principal elements of such a case are describing, relating, and evaluating.

Value categories

 * Used in debate formats: KP

An arrangement of values into groups so that a group (category) can be used as evidence.

Value criterion

 * Used in debate formats: LD

The value criterion ((criterion, standard) is a specific way to achieve or measure value. Common value criterions include, , and . See also:.

Value hierarchy

 * Used in debate formats: LD, KP

Evidence on how some value(s) take priority over others.

Warrant

 * Used in debate formats: CX, LD, PF, CD KP

Stated or unstated reasoning that explains why a is true.