WSDC Debate Concepts Quiz 2025 Intermediate-Hard

What does the term “status quo bias” refer to in WSDC debates?

• Favoring arguments that emphasize change over tradition

• Refusing to challenge assumptions about social norms or even consider jusstice

• The tendency to support the existing system without justification

• The bias of judges toward familiar speaker styles and roles

What is a “moral hazard” in policy argumentation?

• A risk that moral arguments will contradict each other

• A situation where a policy encourages irresponsible behavior

• A type of motion based on ethical dilemmas or immoral claims

• A speaker’s personal bias leaking into a moral claim of the discussion

What best describes a “double bind” in a debate?

• A rebuttal that forces the other team into two losing responses

• A model that contradicts the motion’s wording or their ability to be effective twice

• A policy that creates equal harm and benefit in a double bid for control of the discussion

• A definition that supports both sides equally

What does it mean to “weigh on probability” in an impact comparison?

• To show why a certain outcome is more likely to occur

• To prove that an impact is morally justified

• To compare only short-term harms between teams

• To reduce the importance of long-term outcomes

What does a “first principles” argument rely on?

• Foundational moral or philosophical truths

• Empirical data from recent case studies

• Stakeholder interviews and surveys

• The team’s framing and time allocation

What is the function of a “reframing” strategy in rebuttal?

• Clarifying a stakeholder’s role in the debate

• Proving that an opponent’s principle is flawed

• Changing how the audience sees the importance of an issue

• Repeating your team's original burden of proof

In WSDC, what is a “duty of care”?

• A judge’s responsibility to provide fair adjudication

• An ethical obligation an actor has toward others

• A speaker’s duty to uphold WSDC rules

• A requirement to cite sources accurately

Why is “precedent” often used in debating legal motions?

• To introduce new terminology from law

• To offer evidence that the model is already realistic

• To appeal to older judges with legal experience

• To emphasize the lack of reform in history

Which best defines “false equivalence” in rebuttal?

• A type of harm based on exaggerated hypotheticals

• Treating two unequal harms as if they are the same

• Comparing unrelated stakeholders for emotional appeal

• A rebuttal that is made with incorrect statistics

What makes an argument “exclusive” in structure?

• It cannot coexist with the opposing team’s world

• It only applies to elite or niche stakeholders

• It uses data from a single time period

• It targets emotions rather than facts