Definitions

1. Purpose is to make it clear what the debate is about.

- Safest to Define all of the terms in the resolution and define them in parts, i.e. define each word or group of words separately.

- where the definition is obvious, e.g. Canada, don’t spend a lot of time on it

- You should follow the clear intent of the motion unless it is off-beat or squirrelable

- sometimes word association can help you come up with the definition

- sometimes it is best not to define it literally, especially if it is an offbeat resolution, e.g. Ketchup is essential

- treating it as a metaphor may be a more effective approach

2. Role of case line or principle

- this is the underlying reason(s) why which your case is based on

- some debaters decide on the caseline that they want to argue and then arrange the definition to match it

3. Debatable but not doomed - Be fair not tight

- make certain that your definition is debatable but not so impossible to prove

- you may not define it as a truism, i.e. something inherently true

- e.g. elephants are bigger than mice

- you may not define it as a tautology, i.e. true by definition

- e.g. Canada is the best country and & define best as most like Canada

- you may not define it in an objectionable way, i.e. you or your opposition will have to argue for something obviously offensive

- you may not define it unreasonably e.g specialized knowledge

- you would have more latitude with a general or offbeat resolution than with a policy

- a good test for this is to try to come up with opposition arguments

- if there are no reasonable ones, your definition is undebatable

- if there are some that will completely destroy your argument, you have too weak a definition

4. Paraphrasing

- After you have given your definition, paraphrase it. Make certain that everyone knows what it is that you are trying to prove.

5. How to handle attacks on your definition

- show that it is debatable either by pointing out that “many people maintain that ... (some opposition point) “ or “ The way that society works shows that ...”

- be careful not to make the opp case too strong

- you may wish to also show that the resolution is true even with the opp definition

- make it clear that you are NOT conceding the definition, however

6. How to handle truisms if you are the opposition

- You must prove that it is undebatable, not just state that it is

- You then substitute your own definition and then you argue against the resolution as redefined

- When redefining, usually you should try to stick as close to the old definition as possible and just expand it to make it debatable

- Use a two option approach

- if they meant this, then it is a truism, etc., and we would challenge it so what they must have meant was that ( that being an expansion of their definition to make it debatable)

7. Further references to the definition

- refer back to the definition often, especially in the rebuttal

- keep emphasizing that it is what the government must prove