The counterplan : theoretical and pragmatic reality

The counterplan is a logical, well established, and generally accepted negative strategy in academic debate. Despite a growing interest in its practice, little consensus is evident on the various aspects of counterplan theory. Important to the practice of competitive debate are the tools used for evaluation of argumentation. The criteria for judging the counterplan are applied in practice in a particularly confusing manner. Theoretical literature is divided on the standards for judging the counterplan.

It is granted that theoretical questions concerning counterplan theory should be discussed in debate rounds. It is believed that if such discussion is to be of value, a greater understanding of the various viewpoints of counterplan theorists is necessary. It is with this thought in mind that the present study is offered. It is hoped that a clarification of conflicting positions may aide intelligent debate. A consistent theory of the counterplan is not sought. . Rather, it is the aim of this thesis to delineate the reality of the counterplan in theory and in practice.

The tone of the study is descriptive and analytical. The theoretical bases of the counterplan within the legal, legislative, and parliamentary analogies of traditional debate theory and the systems analysis and hypothesis-testing paradigms of contemporary theory are examined in Chapter II. The historical development of counterplan theory is explored in Chapter IIl. Three major periods are identified. The early period established the foundations of counterplan theory, the middle period saw the development of the counterplan as an acceptable negative strategy, and the contemporary period evidenced confusion and controversy on the question of judging criteria for the counterplan.

Chapter IV examines the nature of judging criteria within the major debate texts and articles addressing the question. Specific criteria addressed are presumption, burden of proof, competitiveness, and nontopicality. Finally, Chapter V explores the counterplan in practice, considering the same relevant criteria. A content analysis of comments concerning counterplan theory in the 1977, 1978, and 1979 National Debate Tournament Judging Booklets is provided. To further examine the nature of the counterplan in practice, a l972 survey is examined. Conclusions regarding the integration of counterplan theory and practice are forwarded.

The conclusions of this thesis indicate a general lack of theoretical consensus on questions central to the theory of the counterplan. This was evidenced on the issues of competitiveness and nontopicality, although there was far from unanimous agreement on presumption and the burden of proof. It is suggested that practitioners become aware of the various views of counterplan theory, and resolve the apparent conflicts on an individual basis within debate rounds. Theory should be extended in practice, but practice should be based on theoretical foundations.