- Slides: 12
Stock issues • ILL • BLAME • CURE • COSTS • BENEFITS
Stock issues ILL: What is the current problem? – Significant (quantitative) – Harmful (qualitative)
Stock issues BLAME: Who/what is responsible for the ill? – Structural – Attitudinal – Inherency
Stock issues CURE: What can we do to correct for the ill? – Plan of action (policy) • Agent- who should act • Mandate- what they should do – Effect (will the cure solve the ill? ) • Topicality- does it address the root issue? • Solvency- is it realistic?
Stock issues COSTS/BENEFITS: Now that we’ve solved for the ill, what other considerations must we account for? – What costs are associated with the cure (and are they acceptable? ) – What additional benefits will accrue (in addition to solving for the ill)?
Constructing Cases Needs case I. Problem A. Ill-there is a significant problem B. Blame-the current policy is to blame II. Solution/Cure A. Plan of action- We need a new policy 1. Agent- who should act 2. Mandate- what should they do B. Effect-this policy will cure the ill realistically C. Potential costs are acceptable III. Benefits
Constructing Cases Comparative-advantages I. Plan of Action A. Agent B. Mandate II. Benefits A. Ill- a significant problem persists B. Blame- current efforts are insufficient C. Cure- the plan solves the ill better than the current policy D. Potential costs are acceptable III. Additional benefits
Constructing Cases Goal I. We share a common goal (statement of value) II. Ill/Blame-current policy is a violation of the goal/value III. Cure A. Plan of action 1. Agent 2. Mandate B. Effect IV. Benefits A. we achieve our goal B. We achieve additional benefits
Refutation Direct refutation – simply follow the constructive case and refute one or more stock issues
Refutation Defense with minor repairs – with minor changes the present policy can correct for the ills – the present system is protected from blame
Refutation Counter-proposals – there are significant ills – blame is established – the opposition’s cure is incorrect or insufficient – a counter-proposal better addressed ill
Refutation Defense of the existing policy - the present policy is not as bad as the affirmative argues - the ills are not as bad as suggested - the blame is not due to the present policy - the benefits of the current policy outweigh any disadvantages