The Debate:

Resolution – the topic being debated. In LD, it’s usually along the lines of “Community vs. national standards,” “Anarchy vs. Tyranny,” “Strict separation of church and state best serves democracy,” etc.

 

Case, or constructive – a set of reasons, supporting facts, and arguments that shows why we should affirm or negate the resolution. Most debaters type them up (or handwrite parts on the bus).

 

Cross-examination, or CX – an opportunity for one debater to ask the other questions. They can be about anything, but they should be relevant and designed to get admissions or concessions from the other. CX is one-way in LD debate. 3 Rebuttal- refuting by offering a contrary contention or argument.

 

Value or value premise – the overall standard by which the round should be weighed. It should be something inherently good, like Societal Welfare, Justice, Individual Welfare, Democracy, Quality of Life, Quality of the Future, etc. “Free Speech” isn’t so great as a value because it can be bad, like in wartime (for more info, go look up the Supreme Court cases Shenck v. U.S. and Abrams v. U.S.).

 

Criterion or value criterion – How you get to, measure, or define your value. For example, a value might be Societal Welfare, and the criterion could be Preservation of Rights. Or: Democracy (value) via Accountability (criterion).

 

Contention – a large argument or set of smaller arguments that supports a case. They often have subpoints, flowed like this, with abbreviations C1 Subpoint A or just (A) (B) (C) and so on.

 

Subpoint – exactly what it sounds like. That is, a point that is a part of the larger umbrella contention. (we’re lazy, so we don’t hyphenate it)

 

Prep time - time to write down some responses in preparation for the rebuttal; total prep time can be 3-5 minutes depending on the tournament)

 

Flow– a piece of paper with many rows and columns on which you write down an outline of what the debaters are saying. Also can be used to refer to a written outline of all the arguments in a debate: see next.

 

“Going down the flow” – just what it sounds like, that is, responding to arguments staring at the “top” or beginning of the previous speech and going to the “bottom” or the end. This what good debaters do: they respond to arguments in a linear or line-by-line fashion, rather than jumping “all over the flow.”

 

Signpost – to indicate where one is on the flow. For example: “In my opponent’s second contention subpoint A, he/she said [tagline]…” Second contention subpoint A can be abbreviated C2A.

 

Tagline – the one-sentence summary of a contention or subpoint. For example: Community standards have a “chilling effect” on teachers which is detrimental to the education of high school students. Or, “the chilling effect.”

 

Claim – an assertion. Example: cheese is good.

 

Warrant – a reason why an assertion is true. Example: cheese has nutrients.

 

Impact – explains the importance of the warranted claim. Example: It’s important that cheese is good, because its nutrients, especially calcium, contribute to a healthy body.

 

Link – a connection between the impacted claim and the value. Example: Since cheese contributes to a healthy body, my value of Individual Welfare is upheld.

 

Card – a piece of evidence, usually a quote from an expert, that proves a point. NOTE: cards should be self-warranting. For example, it’s not enough that Professor John Nash of Princeton University makes an assertion, like “cheese is good,” for it to be true (which is actually a fallacy)

 

Fallacy – “A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference” (www.dictionary.com) Examples – Naturalistic Fallacy, reduction ad absurdum, ad baculum, ad populum, ad hominem… Good summaries are: http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/fallacies_grid.asp http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

 

Harm– something bad that happens because of the position one side takes. For example, if Aff is advocating tha t democracy is better than anarchy, Neg might point out the harm that democracy makes people pay taxes. (The obvious response Aff would say is that we get more benefits from paying taxes than the comparatively small harm of losing income.)

 

Non-unique – a harm or benefit that can happen on either side and is therefore a wash.

 

Wash – nullification of harms/benefits, as when they’re equal on both sides, so they cancel out. (Kind of like in a math equation.)

 

Non-resolutional – just what it sounds like – when a point does not pertain to the resolution. It can also mean something that goes beyond the duty or burden one side has to prove (e.g. a supererogatory action).

 

Supererogatory – superfluous, unnecessary, or otherwise performed or observed beyond the required or expected degree (www.dictionary.com).

 

Drop – When a debater does not address or respond to a subpoint or argument. In other words, they didn’t refute it, so they implicitly agree with it. NOTE: drops must be impacted to count. It’s not enough to say your opponent didn’t refute your argument – you must say why it matters (impacting – why that point is so important, and the fact that your opponent agrees with you means you win the round).

 

Dropping – as in, dropping a debater (not down a flight of stairs!). This means that person lost.

 

Picking Up – winning. Opposite = dropping. 

 

Grouping – usually used in the context of “Group these subpoints together.” It’s just what it sounds like – the debater is addressing several points at once by responding to the underlying idea behind them. This is most common in the 1AR, when there’s only 4 minutes for Aff to cover everything (a tough speech).

 

Voting issue, voter, or crystallization point – why you win the round. It can be an impacted drop extended across the flow in both rebuttals; it can be anything, as long as the debater makes an argument and calls it a voting issue/voter/point of crystallization. Example: I win this round because [argument]. Usually, crystallization is done during the last 2 minutes of the 2NR and 2AR, or for the entire 2AR.

 

Extend – to carry across the flow. I’d recommend literally drawing an arrow from one speech to the next to indicate that the same point is being argued in both speeches.

 

Sliming – when a debater brings up a new point in the second rebuttal, to which the other debater does not have time for nor is obligated to respond. Usually happens more often or is more egregious in the 2AR than 2NR.

 

Crystallize down the flow– instead of crystallizing at the bottom of the second rebuttal, some debaters choose to argue down the flow and then make certain points voting issues. This can be confusing if it’s not signposted well.

 

Timer – an essential part of debate, whether you’re a judging or debating. Be sure to have one – any ordinary kitchen timer will do (I use an egg timer myself). Don’t be stuck using the clocks on the school wall, as they are notoriously inaccurate. 

 

Ad Hominim  (ad hom):  An attack on the person making the argument, not the argument.

 

Bi-directionality:  Where a Resolution urging action uses a verb not specifying the direction of the action, and two conceivable causal directions exist.  For example if the Resolution requires the United States to advance its human rights foreign policy, any given Plan might increase or decrease American involvement in Mexico; either direction may arguably achieve Resolutional ends.

 

Disco:  An extremely risky, winner takes all strategy, usually implemented by a team losing badly in Rebuttals.  A Disco usually involves collapsing the entire round down to one argument or position upon which the round is to be decided.

 

Double-Turn:  Advocating two contradictory position that negate each other.  The theory behind a Double-Turn suggests that the two positions implode under the pressure of coherent advocacy.

 

Reverse Voting Issue (RVI):  An issue, that when defeated, is sufficient to win round.  When one side labels an issue a voting issue, the other side can label it a  reverse voting issue.  For example if the Affirmative wins the voting issue, the Affirmative  wins the round.  Conversely, if the Negative wins the reverse voting issue, then the Negative wins the round.  The argument usually revolves around some notion of risk assessment.  If a round can be won on a single issue, then when the opposition defeats that issue, fair game reciprocity demands that the side that formerly stood to win, should now necessarily lose.  

 

Road Map:  An outline given by the speaker, before the speech begins, to indicate what major positions will be developed or rebutted and in what order.  The Road Map is usually not timed.

 

Shell:  The basic parts of a Disad, Critique, Procedural or other Off-Case.  A Shell usually consists of three basic parts.  In the Disad for example, the Shell would consist of the Link, the Brink and the Impact.

 

Take out (T.O., T/O):  An argument that eliminates its rival

 

Threshold:  A scale of causation that predicts when in time some action will occur based on a measure of some other currently occurring variable.  For example, the camel’s back will be broken when exactly one-thousand pounds of straw is loaded upon it.  One-thousand pounds is the threshold.  time frame:  The time required to achieve some result or Impact.

 

Pay flow: To offer to the winning team one's flow of the round as a sign of respect. This is usually done by spectators of a debate but even participants have sometimes been known to pay flow to their opponents. The side to which flow is paid is not necessarily the side picked by the judge as the winner of the round.