Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Mixing it up with a CP

No description
by

Chris Baron

on 27 May 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Mixing it up with a CP

Mix it up with Counterplans
Status of Counterplan
Describes the role of the CP in the round
Important cross examination question
Informs theory debates
Topicality of CP
Counterplans should NOT be topical
Resolution focus vs. plan focus
Negatives explain why the CP violates a word in the resolution
Not commonly argued
Competition
A counterplan forces a choice. Either:
You
can't
do both the CP and the plan or
You
shouldn't
do both the CP and the plan
The two main types of competition are:
"Mutual Exclusivity" ("You
can't
")
"Net Benefits" ("You
shouldn't
")
Burdens of a Counterplan
Text
Solvency
Competition
Status of CP
Topicality
Winning with Counterplans
Use to neutralize Aff case (Harms X Solvency)
Run in the 1NC
Research specific solvency
Beat the Perm
Win a Net Benefit
Be ready for CP theory
Focus on important Aff solvency cards
Compare potential CP solvency deficit to net benefit
Aligned with CDL Benchmark #23: Counterplans: structure and utility
Mutual Exclusivity says it is impossible to do both the CP and the Plan.
Gucci and Bally?
Mars and Pluto?
Increase funding and eliminate funding?
Net Benefits says you
could
do the CP and the Plan, but you
shouldn't
In other words:
There are one or more Disadvantages that apply to the plan that do not apply to the Counterplan
The permutation ("Perm") is a test by the affirmative to show that you can/should be able to do both, meaning the counterplan doesn't compete.
The Perm: The affirmative test of
counterplan competition
The perm combines the text of the plan with the text of the counterplan
It should have a text
The simple perm: Do Both
Fancy perms
The timeframe perm: Do plan, then CP (or vica verca)
The severance perm: Do some of plan plus CP
The intrinsicness perm: Do both, and then some
Fiat Power
Fiat: Latin for "let it be done"
Fiat power: the ability for the judge to imagine putting a plan into effect
Affirmative fiat power: The resolution says "should"
Negative: usually just says "should not" (stick with the status quo)
But, sometimes they argue a counterplan!
Three main types of status:
1.
Conditional
: "It can be kicked at any time."
2.
Unconditional
: "We advocate only the CP in the debate."
3.
Dispositional
: "We can concede aff. arguments to kick the CP."
Example:
States Counterplan
We needn't worry about topicality, Watson, if the plan is the focus...
Example:
EU Counterplan
These could be specific to the CP, or generic
Not to be confused with "advantages" the CP gets but the plan doesn't get
Good CPs often have multiple net benefits
What are the limits of the CP?
"Fiat abuse"
Prepare for reciprocity arguments
Defend reasonable limits
Fiat abuse:
That's that stuff I don't like!
Why Run a Counterplan?
A Counterplan is a
defensive
strategy to
neutralize
the affirmative case
Used when the status quo is indefensible
Should solve some or all of the affirmative harms
What are we going to do
tonight, Brain? We always get into trouble when we're
bored... I know, let's go out for dinner! Narf!
I suppose this time you're right. We do get into trouble when we're bored. My malaise seems to be a magnet for mischief, if you'll forgive my alliteration. But I believe we should instead entertain ourselves with a cinematic experience: Let's go to the movies!
But Brain, we could do both: Let's get dinner and a movie! A perm!
No, Pinky. Your dinner proposal is sure to involve indigestion in the short term and obesity in the long term. It must be the movies!
Full transcript