Stop Choosing the Wrong Aff
Last year, I often made the flex to my friends that I wrote my case on the first day that resolutions came out. I thought I had deciphered the code that had led to an extraordinary case. However, I soon learned that my “extraordinary case” wasn’t so extraordinary. It fared terribly in debate rounds, leading my debate partner and I to a modest 2-4 record with it through two tournaments. The affirmative case constitutes a crucial part of the team policy debate. But does everyone understand how to select and develop an excellent case?
There are a few essential steps to learning how to select and make a good debate case. In this article, I will focus on how to choose a debate case topic. In another article, I will focus on how to write a good debate case.
The First Step
Many assume the first step to selecting a case is researching and looking through many case options. However, the first step comes slightly before that and begins with a critical idea of what the debater wants. Mainly, what exactly do you want to debate? Thinking about the debates you would like to have can aid your research with a general idea of what to look for while researching. Suppose you have a choice between two different aff cases where one is better strategically but less favorable opinion-wise. I would encourage you to select the case that you prefer. The reasoning behind this comes from the motivation you can achieve from enjoyment. If you start with something you don’t enjoy, you won’t feel as motivated or inclined to research, which means it will end up less strategic at the base. However, on the other side, if you were more motivated to do research, you could make up for the slightly weaker case with more research and affirmative preparation.
Large or Small
For a Team Policy Affirmative, there are two particular categories. Large cases and small cases. For a massive case, reasonably anyone will have heard of it and developed potentially compelling arguments against it. This preparation could present an issue at first. However, it allows you to perceive precisely what a team will run and enables you to prepare for such arguments in the future.
In contrast, most teams have not heard of a smaller case. This, in turn, means many teams will have few arguments to run against you. However, when teams have arguments to run, the arguments might be somewhat unique and one you haven’t heard of, meaning you won’t be as prepared to respond.
Neg Research First
Now let’s say you’ve narrowed the choice down to two or three final cases that you think you should run. The last step before researching the affirmative is exploring the negative side. Achieving such allows you to follow the negative arguments against a case. For example, last year, I ended the year running PLRA. Before I chose this case, I understood all the arguments against it. For example, if I had decided on PLRA and invested 15 to 20 hours researching it and then realized that there was this super strong argument against it, I would have wasted my time. This potential waste of time is why I believe understanding negative arguments against prospective cases is the final step before selecting an affirmative case.
Once you check these three items of your affirmative wish list, I believe you can confidently select an affirmative. The next step is that of creation, which I’ll address in my next article!
