Introduction To Debate Quiz

In "THW invade country X", Proposition states in their model that their military intervention will respect all rules of the Geneva Convention and will end in a month's time. They claim that because of fiat, we must assume that their policy will pass. Is this a correct reading of the fiat rule?

• Yes, we must assume all aspects of Proposition's policy will pass.

• No, only the specific action stated in the motion is assumed to pass.

• No, Proposition must prove all aspects of their policy will pass, including that an invasion will happen.

Answer explanation

Remember that prop fiat means only the specific action stated in the motion is assumed to pass, and that what happens after is up for debate!

In "THW legalize all drugs", the Proposition provides a reasonably compelling case about how this will increase safety, but the Opposition successfully shows that while it may mitigate harms for existing users, the increase in drug usage would lead to more deaths. The 3rd Proposition fully negates (i.e. shows Opp's mechanism falls) the Opposition case regarding increased drug usage with rebuttal. Should the rebuttal from 3rd Prop be credited?

• No, because it successfully negates an important argument from Opp, it can count as an extension and hence new material

• Yes because because the rebuttal successfully took down the Opposition's case.

Proposition only has fiat in "THBT X should do Y" motions. True or False?

• True

• False

On the motion, THBT parents should choose not to send their children to private schools, 1st Opp argues that the more intensive education provided by private schools is likely to help the child have better academic achievements which will make the child happier. In rebuttal, the 2nd Prop argues that learning to socialize with people of all classes will also make the child happier and more successful. Which of the following statements is true?

• The rebuttal is irrelevant and should not be credited.

• The rebuttal weakens the argument, but does not defeat it entirely.

• The rebuttal defeats the argument.

• The rebuttal is preemptively defeated by the argument.

• The rebuttal does not defeat the argument, but constitutes a separate line of reasoning on the proposition side.

Answer explanation

The 2nd prop's response does not directly clash with 1st Opp's argument, but as a statement--it independently is persuasive with respect to fulfilling some of the burdens of proof on the Proposition.

In the debate "THW provide means-tested welfare in the form of basic goods and services (including vouchers), rather than cash payments". Prop analyzes the claim that providing welfare in the form of goods and services helps people make correct choices and spend the money in ways that would most benefit them, rather than, due to errors of judgment, spending it incorrectly. Opp analyzes the claim that people know best what their needs are, what products and services would help them, and they can make the most efficient use of the money. 3rd Opp comes up and says "we cannot expect to know in what way people will make more efficient use of the money so the clash  is a wash. The most important question thus becomes which of the two options creates more buy-in to the welfare state". Which of the following is most accurate?

• The 3rd Opp's pivot away from the clash about whether people can make efficient use of money is dismissive and should be penalised

• 3rd Opp is strategic here because it is difficult to assess spending behaviour when human needs are so different.

Answer explanation

Try to always deal with a clash rather than just making it a wash. It comes off as lazy too.

What is the role of the Reply Speaker?

• To present new substantives that the previous speakers left out

• To provide new analysis on substantives already brought up

• To rebut any points left standing on the opposing side

• To summarise the debate, proving how one's side won specific clashes

Which of these is NOT a Judging Criteria under the WSDC 3v3 format?

• Style

• POIs

• Content

• Strategy

Which of these duties are fulfilled by a 2nd Proposition Speaker?

• Definitions

• Rebuttals

• Substantives

• Extensions

• Case Stance

Motion: THW ban smoking. 1st Prop comes up to talk about the health effects of smoking. 1st Opp rebuts this by talking about the economic benefits of smoking. Is there direct engagement?

• Yes

• No

Motion: THS slum tours. You are side PROP, rebutting the point that slum tour organisers pocket the money earned from these tours. Your rebuttal is "Even if they are taking funds, the slum community still benefits through indirect income, by means of trickle-down economics" What is wrong with this rebuttal?

• You conceded that their point is true, therefore you contradicted your side.

• There is a possible "Not True" rebuttal tier not addressed

• There is a missing "Furthermore", as in all rebuttals in any debate.

• The rebuttal is not answering the motion