Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

General Systems Theory and Counterplan Competition

General Systems Theory and Counterplan Competition Although academic debate on policy questions widely accepts counterplans, the theory evaluating the critical issue of competition has regressed to microscopic comparisons between the plan and counterplan. This trend encourages combinations of proposals which appear at face value able to co-exist, but upon deeper analysis are incompatible. This essay argues in opposition to the trend by applying concepts from general systems theory to competition. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Argumentation and Advocacy Taylor & Francis

General Systems Theory and Counterplan Competition

Madsen, Arnie
Argumentation and Advocacy , Volume 26 (2): 12 – Sep 1, 1989
Download PDF

General Systems Theory and Counterplan Competition

Abstract

Although academic debate on policy questions widely accepts counterplans, the theory evaluating the critical issue of competition has regressed to microscopic comparisons between the plan and counterplan. This trend encourages combinations of proposals which appear at face value able to co-exist, but upon deeper analysis are incompatible. This essay argues in opposition to the trend by applying concepts from general systems theory to competition.
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/general-systems-theory-and-counterplan-competition-0NPRo2fkm3
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 1989 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2576-8476
eISSN
1051-1431
DOI
10.1080/00028533.1989.11951477
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Although academic debate on policy questions widely accepts counterplans, the theory evaluating the critical issue of competition has regressed to microscopic comparisons between the plan and counterplan. This trend encourages combinations of proposals which appear at face value able to co-exist, but upon deeper analysis are incompatible. This essay argues in opposition to the trend by applying concepts from general systems theory to competition.

Journal

Argumentation and Advocacy – Taylor & Francis

Published: Sep 1, 1989

References

  • “Utopian Counter-System Counterplans: The Issue of Competitiveness.”
  • “In Defence of Utopia: A Response to Katsulas, Herbeck, and Panetta.”
  • “Counter-Warrants: An Idea Whose Time Has Not Come.”
  • “The Problem of Inherency: Strategy and Substance.”
  • “Counterplan Competitiveness in the Stock Issues Paradigm.”
  • “A Permutation Standard of Competitiveness.”
  • “The Affirmative Topicality Burden: Any Reasonable Example of the Resolution.”
  • “The Locus of Debate Controversy Re-Examined: Implications for Counterplan Theory.”
  • “Rethinking Counterplans: A Reconciliation with Debate Theory.”
  • “Fiating Utopia: A Negative View of the Emergence of World Order Counterplans and Futures Gaming in Policy Debate.”
  • “Fiating Utopia, Part Two: A Rejoinder to Edwards and Snider.”
  • “A Critique of the Counter-Warrant as a Negative Strategy.”
  • “Beyond the Social Engineering Paradigm: Public Policy Decision-Making—Fifteen Years Later.”
  • “Implications of a Systems Model of Anaiysis on Argumentation Theory.”
  • “A General Theory of the Counterplan.”
  • “Further Examination of Resolutional Focus.”
  • “Counterplans Must be Competitive!”
  • “On Dallas On Competition.”
  • “Conditionality: Creative Constraints on Dreadful Debate.”
  • “The Counter-Warrant as a Negative Strategy: A Modest Proposal.”
  • “Counterplans and Paradigms.”
  • “Building Cases.”
  • “A Defense of the Counter-Warrant as Negative Argument.”
  • “The Relationship between Realism and Debatability in Policy Advocacy.”
  • “Response to a ‘Response.’”
  • “On Competition.”
  • “Fantasy and Reality Revisited: Gaming, Fiat Power, and Anti-Utopianism.”
  • “Counterplan Competition: Permutations and Beyond.”
  • “Negative Fiat: Resolving the Ambiguities of ‘Should’.”