ERIC Number: ED241970
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1984-Feb
Reference Count: 0
Non-Policy Debating and Affirmative Case Formats.
Berube, David M.
In nonpolicy debate, the affirmative speakers must demonstrate the probable truth of a resolution. Successful formats for affirmative cases include (1) generic analysis, (2) example analysis, (3) R. J. Matlon's definitive/designative format, (4) J. Chesebro's criteria approach, and (5) "should" resolution affirmatives. In generic analysis, an approach preferred when topics are worded in the superlative, the affirmative argues that the hierarchical relationship implied by the resolution is desirable, while with example analysis, the affirmative proves the resolution probably true through representative examples of the resolution. Debaters using the Matlonian definitive/designative format establish criteria against which values are tested and then argue that their resolution satisfies those criteria. With the Chesebro's criteria approach, the affirmative presents a set of values that, while not operating within the present system, embody the theoretical requirements of the resolution. Debaters then set forth mandates to implement the specified values. In "should" resolution affirmatives, debaters define the resolution clearly and argue it or a subset of it to prove the resolution true. Successful debaters do not rely on a single format but are familiar with all. (MM)
Publication Type: Reports - Descriptive; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers: Debate Formats
Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Speech Communication Association (Seattle, WA, February 18-21, 1984).