Off-case arguments
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009) |
 |
This article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Please help improve the article with a good introductory style. (October 2009) |
| Part of the series Policy Debate |
|
| Organization | |
| Policy debate competitions |
|
| Format | |
| Structure of policy debate · Resolution |
|
| Participants | |
|
Affirmative · Negative · Judge |
|
| Types of Arguments | |
|
Stock Issues · Case· Disadvantage |
|
| Argumentative Concepts | |
Off-case arguments, sometimes called On-Plan arguments are policy debate arguments presented by the negative in the 1NC. They are generally flowed on a separate sheet of paper each and read before case arguments.
They are so named because they are not directly responsive to the arguments made by the 1AC.
Topicality, although a stock issue, is universally considered an off-case argument, because it deals directly with the plan text rather than the evidence behind it.
| Off-case arguments |
|---|
|
Topicality| Disadvantage| Counterplan| Kritik |
