Man on the Cliff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

"Man on the Cliff" is an analogy relating to argumentation in Policy Debate. The analogy imagines the world in the status quo as a man, walking towards a cliff.

[edit] Affirmative strategies

The affirmative team has several responsibilities to the man on the cliff, each of which correspond to a stock issue. They have to show that:

  • The man is walking towards the cliff (Inherency)
  • Walking off the cliff will have negative consequences for the man (Harms)
  • The affirmative plan will "push" the man away from the cliff, or cause him to start walking in the opposite direction (Solvency)
  • It is important that the man not fall off the cliff (Significance)

[edit] Negative Strategies

The negative has several options for refuting the affirmative's plan that relate to the man on the cliff:

  • The man is not in fact walking towards the cliff, but perhaps away from it. Or, he is not moving at all. (Inherency)
  • Walking off the cliff will actually have positive consequences for the man (Harms)
  • The affirmative plan will not be sufficient to push the man away from the cliff, and he will fall off anyway. (Solvency)
  • The affirmative plan will push the man away from the cliff, but towards a greater peril (such as another, steeper cliff). (Disadvantages).
  • Even if the man falls off the cliff, it doesn't matter (Significance)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/n/Man_on_the_Cliff_9c5e.html"