Skip to content
October 29, 2011 / compassioninpolitics

How to win timeframe on the space exploration high school policy debate topic

If the timeframe question will be the definitive questions in soooo many debates next year, it certainly merits investigation, research, and in-depth strategizing. To that end, here are eight ways to solve the time frame question on the upcoming high school space exploration resolution (if you can think of more or you would like to take issue with any of the 8, feel free to add your suggestions):

1) Perception based advantages:
-competitiveness
-hege (and various forms of space weapons & militarization)
-softpower
-international law/treaty compliance
-trade/coop

2) Relations based advantages:
-china, russia, japan (although the links into this debate will likely go the other way, except with coop cases–which seem extra-topical)

3) Ethics based advantages:
-scientific discovery/knowledge
-innovation/technology
-US = uniquely qualified
-ecological ethics
-disaster based (like hunger)
-probably diseases

4) Niche Affirmatives with quick timeframes. Relatively small affs like Duane talks about (perhaps threat tracking or monitoring or perhaps disease tracking)
-weather
-disaster
-disease (?)

5) Critical Affirmatives.
And obviously **most** critical affirmatives generally avoid timeframe debates (except when disad turns the case or the speed of conciousness raising/mindset shift is in question. I’ve never seen a debate where this was a deciding factor for a critical affirmative unless they accepted DAs as legit)

6) Specific evidence.
-Advantages that change the risk calculus (evidence de jure on assessing impacts–my guess is innovation and technology based solutions have evidence specifically on this question which justify health research which may take decades to yield a viable solution to a disease which kills 100,000k to millions.)
-Advantages that quantify the risk. (I’m pretty sure evidence on this question exists in at least 3 areas of debate, but I’m sure more: malthusian/space/asteroid)

7) Indicts of timeframe based thinking or frameworks (aka DA to your impact calc)
Some of this falls under #6, but I’ve seen poetry used on this question.

8) Credible Systemic Impacts (or hows its almost always been done):
And I’m sure there are a handful of other ways that people will find at camp. And decent system impacts outweigh fast, but probabalistic and contrived and historically disproven DA–otherwise we would never take any risks which results in paralysis.

Otherwise check out the lecture from Georgetown on the question of impact comparison (both the traditional impact assessment lecture and the exploding traditional methods lectures as well as the included document download for the evidence Batterman points to) and the files from Open Evidence on impact assessment and comparison (I think the only file on this question is from last years michigan files). And obviously check out the high school caselist wiki for existing evidence on this question (you might find 4 to 6 cards). Otherwise, investigate the literature on policy analysis and risk evaluation.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: