Glossary

CASE - An way of remembering the components of a case line.

• C - the case statement
• A - the arguments
• S - the strategy
• E - the process of exposing (clash and case analysis)

Case Line - a philosophy of thinking about debate and a method of structuring the arguments made by a team. The case is considered in a broad context, then a case line statement (like a thesis) is generated. Finally three or four arguments to support the case line statement are generated.

• Define resolution: BIRT Canada legalize Euthanasia.
• State thesis: We have the right to determine our own destiny based on our own values, as long as it does not cause greater harm to others
• Arguments:
  1. Canadians have an inherent right to life, liberty and security, which extends to the right to die (legal Charter argument)
  2. Canadians believe in freedom of belief and practice of belief (moral argument)
  3. The potential harm from Euthanasia does not outweigh the benefits (moral preemptive argument)

Case Line Statement - the main point a team is proving. Both the negative and the affirmative have a case line statement, and that statement must agree with the side of the resolution they are on. Also known as a case thesis.

Clash - attacking the argument raised by an opponent. Clash can be a direct attack on one point through another point (see direct clash), an attack on several points by addressing the underlying idea (see global clash) or an attack of the underlying principle of an entire side of a debate (see case line)

Comparative Advantage Case - a type of case where the affirmative attempts to prove that their plan is superior to the current system but not perfect. The plan must meet the goals the current system is based on.

Criteria Case - a type of affirmative case where the affirmative argues that any solution to the problem presented in the resolution must meet a set criteria they have devised. The criteria become the standard that the current system has failed to meet (replacing the needs for change) and the plan must meet the criteria.

Direct Clash - is a type of attack where one argument is specifically refuted using another. For example, if the resolution were BIRT abortion be declared illegal:

• Affirmative point: Abortion is the act of killing a person and people have a right to life.
• Negative direct clash: A fetus is not a person, but the woman is. She has a right to control her own body.

Evidence - is a statistic, quotation or case study (example) to support an argument you are making. Be sure you understand not only what the evidence says, but the reason for saying it and the context. Remember that all arguments must be substantiated with either evidence or logic. See SEDA's Guide to Debate for additional information on rules of evidence.

Global Clash - is a type of refutation where several points in an opponent's case are attacked through one point that strikes at assumptions. For example, if the resolution was BIRT Capital Punishment be reinstated:

• Affirmative points: You can't re-offend if you are dead so lives are saved. You will be less likely to commit murder if you know you will die, so lives are saved.
• Negative global clash: Lives will still be lost because capital punishment is a punishment not a prevention. It is better to prevent the murders by altering the social conditions that encourage murder.

Goals Case - a type of case where the affirmative looks at the stated goals of the current system (they must be formal written goals found in policy or legislation) and proves the current system does not meet those goals (replacing the need for change. The plan introduced by the affirmative meets the goals).

Logic - a method of proving an argument to be true. Logic uses clear, defensible statements that work together to create a point. The statements cannot rest on other points that are unproven (fallacy) or on themselves (circular argument). Remember that all arguments must be substantiated with either evidence or logic. See SEDA's resources on logic on page 2o of the Step to Step Guide for much more detailed information.

Needs case - a type of case where the affirmative identifies 3 reasons change should occur (needs) and suggests a plan to meet the needs.

Policy debate - a debate about what should be done and why. A policy debate requires an affirmative to introduce a plan that solves a problem. The plan must be introduced in the first Affirmative and fully explained by the end of the second affirmative. The negative clashes with the reason for the change and the plan for the change.

SPLEEEM - an acronym for remembering types of arguments you can use in a debate. They include:

• S - social
• P - political
• L - legal
• E - economic
• E - environmental
• E - education
• M - moral

Thesis - the main point a team is proving. Both the negative and the affirmative have a case line statement, and that statement must agree with the side of the resolution they are on. Also known as a case line statement.

Values debate - a debate about the nature of a problem. The focus is on conflicting philosophies about what is true or right. No plan is introduced.