By Jason Luo
What is frivolous theory?
Frivolous theory is theory that is run completely strategically (or jokingly) and oftentimes probably doesn’t actually aim to create better norms. Frivolous theory is an innately tech over truth argument but does not really have a firm definition. Examples include water bottle theory, shoe theory, must evaluate debate after 1st constructive theory, and more. Responding to frivolous theory is no different than responding to more common theory arguments with the added advantage that most PF judges willing to evaluate theory (or not) have a very low threshold for responses to these shells and it’s almost impossible to win these shells under reasonability.
What is metatheory?
Metatheory theory about theory. Any shell about how theory debates are done (for example, debaters may not read multiple shells) falls under metatheory. Structured like any other shell, metatheory is explicitly signposted as metatheory and sometimes argued to operate on a level above standard theory but arguments that theory and metatheory should be evaluated on the same level can also be made.
What if both teams read theory?
Along with responding to your opponents shell normally, treat it like normal LARP debate and weigh the shells. Magnitude, timeframe, probability, link-ins, and prereqs, all are legitimate ways to weigh. For example, disclosure theory, which affects almost every aspect of the first half of the round’s substantive debate, could potentially solve for the harms of dates theory because all the dates you didn’t read were on the wiki, and thus you could argue it links-in.
Can I abbreviate theory as T?
No. T refers to topicality, which is a subset of theory. However, it would be inaccurate to refer to theory in general as T.
Frivolous theory is theory that is run completely strategically (or jokingly) and oftentimes probably doesn’t actually aim to create better norms. Frivolous theory is an innately tech over truth argument but does not really have a firm definition. Examples include water bottle theory, shoe theory, must evaluate debate after 1st constructive theory, and more. Responding to frivolous theory is no different than responding to more common theory arguments with the added advantage that most PF judges willing to evaluate theory (or not) have a very low threshold for responses to these shells and it’s almost impossible to win these shells under reasonability.
What is metatheory?
Metatheory theory about theory. Any shell about how theory debates are done (for example, debaters may not read multiple shells) falls under metatheory. Structured like any other shell, metatheory is explicitly signposted as metatheory and sometimes argued to operate on a level above standard theory but arguments that theory and metatheory should be evaluated on the same level can also be made.
What if both teams read theory?
Along with responding to your opponents shell normally, treat it like normal LARP debate and weigh the shells. Magnitude, timeframe, probability, link-ins, and prereqs, all are legitimate ways to weigh. For example, disclosure theory, which affects almost every aspect of the first half of the round’s substantive debate, could potentially solve for the harms of dates theory because all the dates you didn’t read were on the wiki, and thus you could argue it links-in.
Can I abbreviate theory as T?
No. T refers to topicality, which is a subset of theory. However, it would be inaccurate to refer to theory in general as T.
Sample Theory Shells
Use Verbatim to open these. Also, although these shells are a helpful start, you should optimally write your own shells using these as a guideline.