[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Critique Perms
Ken's explaining this well. I think Alan is underestimating the power of
the critique perm. I would recommend Greg Schnippel's comment on this.
First, start from the assumption that perms test the relevance of a
position to case. Usually that is a counter-plan, but in the case of the
critique the perm becomes a link test. If you view counterplan as a
disad, this is easy to conceptualize. Likewise if you view the critique
as advocacy.
It is too easy to link critiques to properties of the status quo only
manifest in the aff case because it fails to historically escape them.
If the case does not violate the negative's advocated ideology or
reinforce the indicted paradigm, the perm provides an analytic tool to
uncover this. Thus, timeframe perm'ing a critique would seem to me
nonsensical (as all t/f perms may be) but direct perms are a good way to
conceptualize the degree and type of tension between case and the
critique.
Pat Gehrke
CSU Chico
Alan Dove wrote:
> I heard someone do that last weekend, and had to hide my face so the
> debaters wouldn't see me laughing. You can't perm a critique any more
> than you can perm topicality. "We can do the plan, then switch to a
> non-anthropocentric mindset" just doesn't answer the critique if you're
> still anthropocentric in your advocacy. A critique is not a counterplan,
> or a disad, or a procedural position, though I've heard them run in all of
> those forms. Search through Ken Broda-Bahm's postings in the CEDA-L
> archives on Debate Central for some elegant explanations of critique and
> counterplan theories.
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page