5 ms·

This was ubiquitous back when I was doing debate, around 20 years ago. The ship sailed long ago.

syndicatedjelly 3y ago
[dead]
cushychicken 3y ago
Same. The kritik and topicality argument forms were everywhere, and typically pretty fucking boring. It was rare that any negative team would take the time to present counterarguments to any discrete part of the affirmative plan. These, plus the shotgun, rapidfire delivery style, dominated policy debate, and made it pretty un-fun to participate in. I ended up switching to extemporaneous speaking and enjoying it a lot more.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
I never debated, but it was explained to me that a key aspect was talking as fast as you can to introduce as much argumentation to your point as possible (newspaper scoring, kind of). "I guess misdirection from deconstructionistism would be an entertaining alternate tactic. Yes you have introduced 122 points in your favor, but alas the very foundation of your arguments is undermined by my simple deconstruction." The world/life is insane. It is far too large to understand, and even if you did, so unpredictable to be predicted anyway. Thus logical argumentation is subject to nihilistic nullification by a sufficiently skilled / pedantic debater?
- klooney 3y ago
  I mean, debate is Calvinball, so you could go either way. I've seen people win arguing that a K is too generic/doesn't link to the affirmative team's case, and I've seen the affirmative's response get nailed the same way. There's also more performance than people admit to, if your responses seem more competent, that goes a long way. A slow talking K that gets responded to by a team speed reading their prebuilt, 20 point "Foucault was a wanker" folder is probably going to lose.
imbnwa 3y ago
In the 00s alone, I can remember: Fort Hays State winning CEDA Nationals on engaging indigenous rather than Western thought; New York University winning CEDA Nationals on Zizek's 'letter of the law' paradox as a warrant to trying George W Bush at the International Criminal Court for war crimes; Kentucky-Louisville winning CEDA Nationals on the racial and class bias of policy debate. I can't recall if a Kritik ever won the NDT, but much like the TOC, the judging pool is much more a closed loop of the inside circle the competition.
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  > I can't recall if a Kritik ever won the NDT Emporia SW won the NDT which was covered heavily in mainstream media
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

[dead]

Same. The kritik and topicality argument forms were everywhere, and typically pretty fucking boring. It was rare that any negative team would take the time to present counterarguments to any discrete part of the affirmative plan. These, plus the shotgun, rapidfire delivery style, dominated policy debate, and made it pretty un-fun to participate in. I ended up switching to extemporaneous speaking and enjoying it a lot more.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

I never debated, but it was explained to me that a key aspect was talking as fast as you can to introduce as much argumentation to your point as possible (newspaper scoring, kind of). "I guess misdirection from deconstructionistism would be an entertaining alternate tactic. Yes you have introduced 122 points in your favor, but alas the very foundation of your arguments is undermined by my simple deconstruction." The world/life is insane. It is far too large to understand, and even if you did, so unpredictable to be predicted anyway. Thus logical argumentation is subject to nihilistic nullification by a sufficiently skilled / pedantic debater?

klooney 3y ago
I mean, debate is Calvinball, so you could go either way. I've seen people win arguing that a K is too generic/doesn't link to the affirmative team's case, and I've seen the affirmative's response get nailed the same way. There's also more performance than people admit to, if your responses seem more competent, that goes a long way. A slow talking K that gets responded to by a team speed reading their prebuilt, 20 point "Foucault was a wanker" folder is probably going to lose.

imbnwa 3y ago

In the 00s alone, I can remember: Fort Hays State winning CEDA Nationals on engaging indigenous rather than Western thought; New York University winning CEDA Nationals on Zizek's 'letter of the law' paradox as a warrant to trying George W Bush at the International Criminal Court for war crimes; Kentucky-Louisville winning CEDA Nationals on the racial and class bias of policy debate. I can't recall if a Kritik ever won the NDT, but much like the TOC, the judging pool is much more a closed loop of the inside circle the competition.

whimsicalism 3y ago
> I can't recall if a Kritik ever won the NDT Emporia SW won the NDT which was covered heavily in mainstream media
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]