1.7 Theory

What is Theory?

Theory is a broad term that describes arguments which don’t have anything to do with the substance of the debate (i.e. whether the plan is good or bad) – but more directly relates to a practice or norm that an opponent did, and describes how that is bad.

Structure of Theory

Theory arguments generally follow this structure:

1. An interpretation – this describes what debate should look like.
   1. For example, debaters should specify the US branch doing the plan.
2. Violation – what the opponents did which violates the interpretation.
   1. For example, the opponents did not specify the US branch doing the plan, and just wrote “USFG.”
3. Standards – why it’s important to uphold your interpretation.
   1. For example:
      1. Clash – we can’t engage in the nuances of separation of powers and the specifics of plan implementation as well.
      2. Ground (this is a term to describe how many arguments each side has) – the negative loses arguments like Courts CPs (an argument that says the courts, i.e. the judicial branch, should do the plan).
4. Impacts – why those standards matter.
   1. For example:
      1. Fairness – it’s unfair for us because we lose so much negative ground that inhibits our ability to answer their arguments.