[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Theory is a normative construct

I try to emphasize often that theory is a normative construct --
in other words, it is not a view into the 'true' or the
'correct.' It is something that we _make_ -- something that acts
as a better or worse solution to the constraints we face, but
something that is no stronger than the reasons behind it.

When theory becomes didactic it becomes simply a matter or power.

For example, Professor Berube seeks to correct the
'misperceptions' of plan plan theory.  There is danger in reading
his observation as a simply stated truth: 'in parametric debate
the aff becomes the topic so there is no such thing as a topical
counterplan.'  This is a point of view.  Our question ought to be
"is there any particular advantage to this point of view?"  "Does
it serve as a better solution than other possibilities?"  "Why is
it bad -- not wrong, but bad -- to see the 'topical ground' as a
larger set than 'affirmative ground' in a parametric debate?"  My
argument, also Korcok's argument, is that it would be _better_ to
see potential topical ground as larger than aff ground because
otherwise we have no practical way of measuring topicality.  But
my point isn't to argue for that reason, but to argue for a
normative perspective.

Even definitional debate is normative at base.  We choose
definitions not solely based on a self-referential appeal to
linguistics.  When faced with competing interpretations, it helps
to focus on which meaning will help us most. Posing it as a
normative choice makes for better debate by placing an emphasis
on reason-giving.

What we call "theory" is not radically different than what we
call "substantive debate:"  those who propose an alteration to
current practice ought to have something like a 'plan.'  That
plan ought to have 'advantages.'  Those who oppose such a change
can identify 'disadvantages' or propose 'counterplans.'  It is a
normative battle in which impacts are every bit as important.

Ken Broda-Bahm
Towson State University
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page