Value and Value Criterions

What are Values and Value Criterions? In Lincoln Douglas Debate, the judge needs a way to weigh the importance of your contentions. The best way to go about that is to determine what your contentions are trying to achieve. Peace? Life? Morality? What you’re trying to achieve is the Value. How you achieve it, or the actions you take to get to peace or life or morality is called your Value Criterion.

What Should I Use as A Value Values are generally good NOUNS you want to achieve. This means that you’re value can literally be anything you want. Do you want to achieve pizza for everyone? Then your value will be Pizza. Unfortunately for us, it’ll have to be something pertaining to philosophy. Whatever you feel is the best Value for your case, you may use.

How Do I Know if a Value is Right? Your contentions are your new best friends. They will tell you everything you need to know about your value. The basis of your contentions will lead you to what you’re trying to achieve. Consider these contentions: Truth Seeking protects Individual Rights and gives the accused what they are due. Victims of crimes have a right to truth Truth Seeking is the main goal of the Criminal Justice System. What is the Value for these?

Well, I think… Those were contentions from my actual case in the November-December topic of this year. I used the value of Justice. NOTE: The resolution was pertaining to the CJS (Criminal Justice System), and usually, they’re top priority (or your best value choice) is Justice.

I Didn’t Say That…Am I Wrong? Nope. We could’ve been seeing different parts of the contentions. I completely understand a value of Individual Rights considering those words (or a said variation) is directly in two of my contentions. You have no idea what those contentions were about, so you have no way of getting a “correct” answer. Just use your own brain to find what you believe is the best for your case.

So What’s a Value Criterion? The ACTION (verb or verbal) you take to achieve said Value. Protecting Individual Rights leads to Justice and Rolling Out the Dough can lead to Pizza.

What Should I Use as A Value Criterion? This one is a bit trickier. Unfortunately, this does require some knowledge of your Value, but you should be able to do enough researching and defining to know through your contentions what to use as a value criterion. Refer back to my previous example of contentions and value. What should my value criterion be?

Pfffffff, That’s a Very Good Question… I used the value of Protecting Individual Rights, because I believe that was the best way to connect my contentions to my value. There should be an evident and logical cycle for the judge to follow.

What Do You Mean By Cycle? Your contentions should guarantee the action that is your Value Criterion is happening on your side. Your contentions are the smooth roads and flashing neon lights that tell the judge if you want this action done, choose my side. This leads to your Value Criterion, which should be supported with links and evidence, and that will tell the judge that this action leads to this wonderful other thing: Your Value.

Evidence? I Need Evidence for This? Yes, generally. You can support using two different methods. The best one for a short amount of time (e.g. the one you’ll be using) is to simply state why your value is important to the resolution and why your value criterion leads to your value. There are other methods, but those take much longer and can be learned in high school with the big dogs.

Wait, What If My Opponent Has A Different Value? Good question. One answer is “value clash.” A value clash is when you take your opponent’s value, explain why it’s horrible and totally not relevant, sufficient, or separate, and then explain why yours should be preferred.

I Have No Idea What You Just Said Relevant: Does it pertain to the resolution i.e. Value of Pizza when talking about the Death Penalty Sufficient: Is this all we need? i.e. Value of Knife when talking about Making a Sandwich Separate: Are the Value and Value Criterions the same? i.e. Value of Individual Rights and a Value Criterion of Protecting Individual Rights

What if We Have The Same Value? Then focus on the value criterion (you’ll need to do that too if you have different values). If you have the same value criterion, something that’s very possible with such a specific topic and only a handful of people researching, then rebut on a contention-contention basis.

And That’s It? Pretty much. If you have any questions on this powerpoint or any other powerpoint, please Mrs. Frey and she’ll forward it directly to me, or you can get my from the group ones sent out each week. Thanks!