Introduction
Identifying the Subject of Evaluation
Providing Criteria
Applying Criteria
Superiority of Values
Sample Affirmative Construction

Affirmative Analysis Review

Applying Criteria

WEIGHING THE SUBJECT OF EVALUATION: How is the problem serious enough to affect members of the audience and their value systems? (What they believe to be important?)

1. Identifying the NeedsNeeds, Indetifying: A debater should answer specific questions concerning the proposition depending on the type of proposition:
   • PROPOSITION OF FACTPROPOSITION OF FACT:
     1. Why has the proposition been brought under question?
     2. What facts are available to support the proposition?
     3. How are these facts significant?
     4. How do the facts presented fulfill the criteria?
   • PROPOSITION OF VALUEPROPOSITION OF VALUE:
     1. Why is the proposition being considered?
     2. What purpose does the Subject of Evaluation serve?
     3. What benefits have been produced thus far?
     4. How does acceptance of the resolution fulfill the criteria?
   • PROPOSITION OF POLICYPROPOSITION OF POLICY:
     1. Why is there a need for change?
     2. How is that need significant?
     3. How is the proposed change practical?
     4. How does the proposed change fulfill the criteria?
   • PROPOSITION OF COMPARISONPROPOSITION OF COMPARISON:
     1. Why is a determination between values necessary?
     2. What benefits result from acceptance of the Subject of Evaluation?
     3. What flaws are associated with the alternative?
     4. How does acceptance of the proposition fulfill the criteria?
2. Establishing A Pragmatic Base:
   1. Pragmatic - practical, matter-of-fact, realistic, based on clear evidence. For example, a pragmatic person would work on a professional degree, e.g. a physician, in order to become wealthy instead of a non-pragmatic who would depend on winning the lottery.
   2. Pragmatic Materials:

• REAL EVIDENCE - consist of things seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched. When reliably reported, this type of evidence is the most persuasive within a debate round.
• Statistics - factual numbers, e.g. thirty percent of all Texans drop out of high school.
• Facts - observable facts, e.g. a fisurable explosion will occur when U-238 reaches critical mass.
• Events - actual occurrences, e.g. the United States established diplomatic ties with the People's Republic of China in 1979.
• Examples - a small sampling of multiple occurrences, e.g. a Buddhist nun was raped and beaten for possessing a picture of the Daili Lama.

• PERSONAL EVIDENCE - consists of summarized statistical data, conclusions based on real evidence, and authoritative opinions. Personal evidence is less persuasive than real evidence but is frequently required to support a position.
• Summarization and Conclusions must meet the validity tests presented in the first section of this handbook; true premises, sufficient samplings, representative samplings, and conclusions drawn from the evidence.
• Authoritative Opinions must be sound (based upon factual evidence), unbiased (objective, not slanted to achieve a specific purpose), and the authority must be a qualified expert (sufficient education, background, and experience with the matter at hand).

Example: The example proposition may be considered either a Proposition of Value or a Proposition of Comparison. For the sake of simplicity, this example will treat it as a Proposition of Value.

• WHY IS A DETERMINATION BETWEEN VALUES NECESSARY?

Genetic Manipulation Is A Concern Because It Is New And Unexplored. According to the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), "The effects of any new technology introduced on the scale anticipated for biotechnology extend beyond the factories and research centers influencing our everyday lives... Many countries are actively reviewing the safety and ethics of biotechnology research and its applications." ("Biotechnology in Perspective." Washington, D.C.: Biotechnology Industry Organization, 1990.)

• WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE SUBJECT OF EVALUATION SERVE?

The Purpose Of Genetic Research Is To Advance Society.Dr. Donald Kennedy, former president of Stanford University, reports, "First, it offers an unparalleled sweep of new opportunity. Those who are practicing the technology, let alone the investors, see exciting prospects of new medications, new agricultural crops, new means of remediating environmental problems. It is, in short, the source of stupendous possibilities. ("Winding Your Way through DNA" symposium, which took place at the University of California San Francisco in 1992.)

• WHAT BENEFITS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED THUS FAR?

Genetic Engineering Has Already Produced Numerous Benefits.Genetech reports examples of DNA research, "1983 - Eli Lilly received a license to make human insulin. A study of an extended family in Venezuela with Huntington's chorea demonstrated that family members with the disease show a distinct and characteristic pattern of restriction fragment lengths. The same methods of investigation revealed patterns for cystic fibrosis, adult polycystic kidney disease, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and others. 1985 - Genetically engineered plants resistant to insects, viruses, and bacteria were field tested for the first time. 1986 - The FDA granted a license for the first recombinant vaccine (for hepatitis). 1988 - a licensing agreement for two anti-cancer drugs, Interleukin-2 and Polyethylene Glycol Modified IL-2. 1989 - a recombinant vaccine against the deadly rinderpest virus, which had wiped out millions of cattle in developing countries. 1990 - The FDA licensed Chiron's hepatitis C antibody test to help ensure the purity of blood bank products."("1977 -Present: The Dawn Of Biotech,"Access Excellence, Genentech, Inc., 93)

• HOW DOES ACCEPTANCE OF THE RESOLUTION FULFILL THE CRITERIA?

Stringent Guidelines Reduce Possible Negative Effects To Virtually Nil. BIO reports, "Following initial concerns that genetic engineering could give rise to infectious organisms ... a stringent set of guidelines was drawn up by the government and leading scientists in the mid-1970s ... While it is not possible to eliminate completely the risk of a genetic engineering accident, the experience of the last ten or so years of research has indicated that the chances of constructing a disease-producing organism by accident are very remote... Provided such vigilance is maintained, mankind can look forward to a wide range of exciting prospects that stem from biotechnology." ("Biotechnology in Perspective." Washington, D.C.: Biotechnology Industry Organization, 1990.)

The Net Effect Genetic Research Is Overwhelmingly Beneficial. BIO asserts, "Biotechnology has, for example, made it possible to detect, and in some cases treat, diseases such as sickle-cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, diabetes, and cystic fibrosis... The potential benefits include solving world food shortages, and improvements in medicine, agriculture, and veterinary sciences. We can confidently expect biotechnological solutions to many essential industrial processes that currently produce toxic effluents." ("Biotechnology in Perspective." Washington, D.C.: Biotechnology Industry Organization, 1990.)

Applying Criteria Exercise: Using a single topic, write four propositions -- one for each type of proposition (Fact, Value, Policy, Comparison). Select a value and criteria that is appropriate for each proposition, research the topic, apply the criteria with evidence for each proposition.

Return to top of page

Superiority of Values

The debater must demonstrate that his value (e.g. Scientific Progress) is more important than any possible negative value.

Sub-steps in Establishing the Superiority of Values:

• Preempting possible negative values and criteria.
• Establishing the importance and foundation for the affirmative value,
• Establishing the link between the value and criteria.

Preempting Possible Negative Values And Criteria: Since the affirmative must speak first, he is only able to anticipate negative counter values and criteria. An affirmative debater who is aware of the negative's position will be able to preempt many negative attacks (refute an argument before it is given). This can be accomplished by one of two methods.

• Negate The Resolution and complete steps (A) and (B) of constructing a prima facie case.

  ORIGINAL: Resolved: That the benefits of genetic manipulation of nature are more important than the moral implications.
  NEGATION #1: Resolved: That the benefits of genetic manipulation of nature are NOT more important than the moral implications.
  NEGATION #2: Resolved: That the moral implications of genetic manipulation of nature are more important than the benefits.

• Negative Value: Since the negative's Subject of Evaluation now involves "moral implications," the negative's value must deal with ethics, morality, and social norms. A good negative value might include MORAL IMPERATIVES.

  Definition: "ultimately correct"- certain actions are right or wrong - not because of any effect they produce, but because they are good or bad according to a "higher" code of ethics.
  Importance: Through adherence to a high code of ethical behavior, the spiritual health of all individuals is secure. We are at peace with ourselves and therefore the quality of life is enhanced.
  Foundation: There are many things that we, as society, can do that would increase our material standard of living. For example, we could exterminate the aged, infirmed, and handicapped thus lessening our tax burden and increasing our material wealth. However, since all societies find this act morally repulsive, the spiritual cost outweighs any possible monetary gain.

• Negative Criteria: The negative key evaluative phrase "more important" remains the same while the comparative term "benefits" is negated. The negative debater must show that the benefits are NOT of greater value than the results of doing what some consider to be wrong.

  Best Criteria: Technically the negative should use the affirmative's criteria. In this case, the negative would try to demonstrate that the Ultimate Effects of the moral implications would outweigh the benefits of genetic manipulation.
  Usual Criteria: Usually, however, the negative will select a counter-criterion that directly supports their value. In this case, the negative may select Ultimate Worth that is the direct opposite of ultimate effects.

• Value - Criteria Rebuttal Preparation: Since, technically, the negative is supposed to clash (refute) the affirmative's case, a debater should prepare a number of "prepared" preemptive arguments against possible negative positions. This enables a debater to quickly respond to a variety of different situations that occur during specific rounds. Debaters must be careful when using this method, however, because these arguments are generic -- not specifically related to the individual cases being argued.

Example Of A Preemptive Argument:

Some Object To Genetic Manipulation Because They Consider It "Playing God" Or A Disruption Of The 'Natural Order' -- a sort of Frankenstien process. This, however, is not the case. Alteration of the 'natural order' has become commonplace and accepted in our society. For example, we place premature newborns in artificial incubators and place them on artificial respirators because 'nature' has dealt them an unfair blow. When we are sick, we go to the doctor and consume chemicals that alter the 'natural' processes of our bodies, because we believe that the benefits of 'scientific progress' outweigh the 'moral implications' of trusting the 'natural' process of healing. Genetic manipulation is simply a different form.

Anticipating Negative Counter Values And Criteria Exercise: Using one of the propositions developed in the Applying Criteria Exercise, identify possible negative values and criteria and write a sample preemptive argument.

• Establishing the Importance and Foundation for the Affirmative Value: The Identify and Define the Objective of Evaluation step identified and defined the affirmative value. It is at this point that the affirmative should establish the importance and foundation of their value using authoritative evidence. This is the Philosophical section of your case. It is not a case of pragmatics- it is a case of human nature and what should be the case. Build your case upon the importance of the concept or attitude the affirmative position dictates. Notice, much of the evidence used in this section is old - discuss long-standing theories, principles, and ideas.

  Example For The Sample Case:

Progress is Intrinsic in Humankind. Henry George, in The Law of Human Progress, asserts, "Many of the characteristics, actions, and emotions of man are exhibited by the lower animals; but man ... has never yet been found destitute of one thing of which no animal shows the slightest trace, a clear recognizable but almost undefinable something, which gives him the power of improvement -- which makes him the progressive animal." (British Journalist, 1917, p.4)

Progress is the Hope of Man's Future. John Edsall, Professor of Biochemistry, contends, "We cannot point to a single definitive solution of any one of the problems that confront us -- political, economic, social, or moral ... We are still beginners, and for that reason may hope to improve. To deride the hope of progress is the ultimate fatuity, the last word in poverty of spirit and meanness of mind." (Harvard university, Progress and Its Discontents, 1982, p. 159)

Progress is a Key to Advancing Civilization. Progress, in the scientific sense, has been of great benefit to human civilization producing modern technology that has reduced death and suffering, improved economic productivity, and increased the quality of life. Clearly, without scientific progress, man would be living in a cave, gathering berries, and eating raw meat.

Establishing The Link Between The Value And Criteria: The Providing and Applying Criteria steps implied a link between the value and criteria. The final step in developing a prima facia case involves confirming a direct link between the value and criteria and demonstrating why that process is better than any competing systems.

Scientific Progress Is The Most Important Human Value Because It Is The Absolute Perfection Of Ultimate Effects. Scientific progress has produced and will continue to produce good - saving millions and improving the quality of life for all. Morality, however, is inherently subjective. People have different values and different moral beliefs. As such people disagree as to what is good and bad. Outcome is the only reasonable means of evaluation. Genetic manipulation of nature promotes positive benefits while limiting negative consequences - the criterion is fulfilled.

Affirmative Value Argument and Link Summary Exercise: Using the proposition in the previous exercise, the L-D Baylor Briefs, value debate briefs, and your own research and explanations, write an affirmative value that contains two pieces of authoritative evidence and your own explanation of the value foundation. Then write a linking summary for your entire case.

Writing The Case: Once you have all of the components, you are ready to organize the ideas and write the affirmative construction. In order to make your case clear, you may need to add brief explanations for various components. Because of the time limit, you may also be forced to leave out information that you feel is important. Organize and balance - do not just throw something together. What issues are vital in establishing a strong position?

Return to top of page