Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.



H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

50 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
That position which is most consistent with the Constitutional law should win
The position which absorbs, supersedes, or subsumes the opponent's claims should win.
The relative costs and benefits of adopting a value position are weighed against not adopting it.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
This criteria claims that the ends, means, and intent of a given position need to be in compliance with a previously cited value
Ends-Means Analysis
The most urgently needed or most threatened hierarchy, as publicly recognized, should win.
Exigence and Salience
That position which maximizes individual liberty should win.
Freedom/Liberty Maximization
That position which benefits future generations the most should win.
That position which can be scientifically proven to be true should win.
Hypothosis Testing
On the hierarchy of human needs, that position which most completely fufills an individuals needs should win.
Maslow's Hierarchy.
That position which is the ultimate goal of a value decision and an action can be shown to be moral if it should universally apply to all people in all situations.
Normative Standard
That position which best reflects the values of society should win.
Social values
the superior position in a round needs to prove to be universally accepted by all people in similar situations
That position which achieves the most of a specified value should win.
Value Maximization or Utilitarianism
The ability of the affirmative plan to function
the debators who are arguing in favor of adopting the resolution
The reasons why the judges decide to give the decision to one team instead of the other.
voting issues
the 1st speech given by the debators
constructive speech
the concept that the affirmative plan and case must deal with the subject for debate and prove why the topic should be adopted
a debate format with a questioning period b/w constructives
cross-examination debate
a debate with two-person teams
team debate
a harm resulting from the adoption of the affirmative plan
a debate format with no questioning periods
standard debate
the outline of a disadvantage given by the negative
disadvantage shell
the ability of the affirmative to solve needs or gain advantages
the logical division of arguments by the negative team
division of labor
one complete debate
competitive speech events
individual events
the subject for debate
the barrier which keeps the status quo from achieving the affirmative case rationale
evidence and argumentation which deny the validity of the opponent's position
a debate using a proposition of value
Lincoln-Douglas Debate
the second speech given by the debaters
the debaters arguing against the adoption of the resolution
the debate topic which centers on a values conflict
proposition of value
the specific approach the negative will uphold throughout the debate
negative position
the debate topic which calls for a determination of fact
proposition of fact
the debate topic which argues for or against a particular course of action
proposition of policy
a debate on a policy topic
policy debate
the max amount of time used by each team b/w speeches
preparation time
aka bandwagon fallacy, agrument is valid because everyone supports it.
appeals to popular opinion
fallacy suggesting one follow a course of action because it is how it has always been done
appeals to tradition
fallacy occuring when a debater doesn't listen to an entire argument and argues what they thought their opponent would say.
hasty generalization
negates the source of evidence
ad hominem
suggests that if a plan is adopted, many disastrous events will occur
slippery slope
occurs when the evidence and claim are treated as the same thing
appeal to authority
this fallacy occurs when debaters do not recognize the definition for a term defined by the opponent
a complete thought process for evaluating a given subject.
value system
a theoretical pattern which takes a perspective and places it in context
basis on which reasoning proceeds
standard by which the debate should be judged