1705133502
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132336]
1705133503
4.4 Analyzing Potential Issues
1705133504
1705133505
After considering the background of the topic, the type of motion being debated, and the particular definition and interpretation, the debaters then turn to an analysis of the potential issues that might be introduced in the debate. Although issues of definition and interpretation involve the first team in the debate (First Government in Worlds-Style debate), analyzing the motion to determine potential issues is something in which all debaters need to engage.
1705133506
1705133507
One systematic method of analyzing potential issues that might arise in a debate is called “stock issues analysis.” Stock issues analysis is an approach to thinking about arguments that centers on very common (stock) issues. These are issues that arise over and over again. By reflecting on these issues when constructing their cases, debaters are able to formulate a set of arguments that they may use during the debate. Stock issues differ depending on whether the debate is about a value motion or a policy motion.
1705133508
1705133509
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132337]
1705133510
4.4.1 Stock Issues for a Value Motion
1705133511
1705133512
Stock issues for a value motion center around two questions: (1) what criteria should be used to determine whether a certain value is appropriately assigned to a certain object, and (2) does the assignment of the value to the object follow those criteria? This text will refer to those stock issues as criteria and application, respectively.
1705133513
1705133514
The first stock issue (criteria) for a proposition of value asks the question, “What criteria should be used to judge whether or not the value can be assigned to the object?” A criterion is a standard or a measure that a person can use to evaluate something. For example, the Gross Domestic Product is a criterion (a measure) of the health of a country’s economy. In a value motion, debaters need to identify the criteria that will be used to measure the object of evaluation. For instance, by what criteria can “immoral” be measured? What is the criterion by which something becomes “too restrictive?” Under what criteria would a rich-poor gap be too “excessive?” How would a society determine that something is “too Westernized?”
1705133515
1705133516
The second stock issue (application) then asks how the particular object of evaluation meets or does not meet the criteria. Does smoking in public meet the standard of morality? Does the hukou policy meet the criteria of “too restrictive?” Does the rich-poor gap meet the benchmark of “excessive?” Does the current Chinese generation meet the conditions for being “too Westernized?”
1705133517
1705133518
The table below illustrates some of the questions that arise from a stock issues analysis of a value motion. Those questions then can be used to help debaters identify some of the issues that the debate might engage. Also, by considering those two questions, debaters facing a value motion are able to construct their own arguments as well as prepare to respond to arguments that their opponents might introduce.
1705133519
1705133520
1705133521
1705133522
1705133523
In their analysis of the motion, a consideration of those questions will assist debaters in determining what issues might become important in the debate. They can use this analysis to determine which issues they want to introduce in the debate as well as which issues their opponents might introduce.
1705133524
1705133525
Stock issues for a policy motion are considered next. Because policy motions are more common in educational debate, this text will provide a more in-depth treatment of stock issues for policy.
1705133526
1705133527
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132338]
1705133528
4.4.2 Stock Issues for a Policy Motion
1705133529
1705133530
The set of stock issues for a policy motion that will be used in this text is one formulated by George W. Zigelmueller and Jack Kay6. Using a medical analogy, they argue that most cases for a change in policy can be conceptualized by identifying four issues: ill, blame, cure, and cost. When a physician is deciding what kind of treatment to give a patient, the physician first needs to determine the sickness that the patient is facing (ill). To determine the ill, the physician might ask about the symptoms that the patient is experiencing. For example, perhaps the patient is experiencing pain in the lower right abdomen. Next, the physician needs to determine the cause of the sickness (blame). By placing pressure on the lower right abdomen, the physician can see if the pain intensifies and, if so, can begin to assess the cause or blame as appendicitis. The physician may also conduct other tests to identify the cause of the illness. After the cause has been determined, the physician then determines the proper treatment (cure). Ordinarily, the treatment for appendicitis is a procedure called an appendectomy or removal of the appendix.
1705133531
1705133532
Before settling on the procedure that will be used to cure the patient, the physician will consider possible side effects (costs) of the procedure. If the physician and the patient decide that the effects of the illness, in this case appendicitis, are worse than the risks of the appendectomy, they may decide to go ahead with the procedure.
1705133533
1705133534
That analogy can easily be used for discovering potential arguments about a policy motion. First, considering the status quo (the present policy), the debater asks about the ill or the problems that exist in the present action. Is the present way of doing things associated with particular harms? Are those harms significant in terms of their negative effects? Do the harms affect a substantial number of people? Second, the debater then considers blame or the cause of the problems. Are the problems in the status quo caused by the present system, or are they caused by factors unassociated with the present system? If the debater can determine that the problem is caused by some part of the present system, he or she can create a plan or a proposal to cure the harms. The easiest way to assess whether or not the proposal will cure the harms in the status quo is to determine if something about the status quo is causing those harms, then to determine how that cause can be eliminated or modified to reduce or eliminate the harms. Finally, the debaters, particularly those debaters who prepare to oppose the proposal, will want to consider the costs of change. The concept of cost is not limited to monetary cost. The debaters will want to consider what negatively valued effects the proposed change will have. Thus, by considering those four stock issues, debaters can begin to think about the kinds of arguments that can be used to support or oppose a change in policy.
1705133535
1705133536
The next two sections focus on how the Government and Opposition Teams can use the stock issues approach to formulate a set of arguments.
1705133537
1705133538
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132339]
1705133539
4.4.3 Government Approach to Stock Issues
1705133540
1705133541
When determining what kinds of arguments to construct, Government Teams ordinarily will focus their immediate thinking on the first three stock issues: ill, blame, and cure. Of course, as will be discussed later, they need to think about the issue of cost, but their thinking about that issue will ordinarily be determined by the response of the Opposition Team. Below is a list of questions that the Government speakers might consider when trying to determine important issues they may want to include in the debate:
1705133542
1705133543
Stock Issues from the Government Viewpoint
1705133544
1705133545
1705133546
1705133547
1705133548
The above questions are about consequences because they seek to determine the effects that actions have on people. In other words, the questions seek to determine if an action has positive or negative consequences on people. Ultimately, the Government Teams will attempt to support the idea that their proposal will have positive consequences. Perhaps a simple example about smoking in public places will help to clarify the use of stock issues for a policy motion:
1705133549
1705133550
Stock Issues Applied to Smoking in Public Places Government Viewpoint
1705133551