History of CPs However, recently, I had someone tell me that early counterplans hadI was hoping someone out there could help answer a few questions. They are:

[pshayes@CCTR.UMKC.EDU]

1)  What was the original justification for why the counterplan was relevent to
the judges decision. (why did the existence of a superior alt. mean the neg
won) ?

2)  If it wasn't competition, did Comp. develop as a check to neg ground, a way
of forcing sequiter, or for some other reason?  Were there intermediate stages
that wer distinct from either the original or the current?

)3)  I've always assumed the topicality consideration developed because (a) the
CP provided a warrant for the Res. and (b) to protect Aff ground. 
 Is this thecase?

4)  Was there a large debate as to the legitimacy of Neg fiat?  It seems to me
like if someone "broke" a CP on me I'd be saying  "hey you can't do that, my
plan still proves the res true absent the presence of the CP which is my only
burden" .   were the original justification distinct from current ones?



I've got a few more questions but their not as signifigant.  I'm curious about
this subject because many times in considering CP theory it seems to me that
having an understanding of past theory would be a signifigant aid in
undeestanding current theory and in developing new arguements.  I think it is
important to be aware of and understand past debates to allow theory debates to
avoid repeating past cycles of theor and instead build on the ideas already
developed.  Finally, I just find the subject
interesting.


Paul Hayes - UMKC

---

• Prev by Date: CEDAWF
• Next by Date: Re: WWF
• Prev by thread: CEDAWF
• Next by thread: Critiques: Resp. to Matt R. & Jan H.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page