Approaching Different Types of Motions

       -Arunav Utpal Aritra

Introduction: Different motions require distinct discussions. For instance, "THR" or “THBT” and "TH as X" represent entirely different types of motions within the spectrum. As a result, the specific wording or phrasing in a motion influences the burdens each team must address. 

There isn't a definitive rule for determining how to approach different motions. Yet, there are some general perceptions and strategies that we can leverage. 


There are broadly three types of motions: 


ANALYSIS MOTIONS


There are several subsections under the branch of analysis motions. 


THBT: 

It too can be classified into two types: 

Example: THBT it is in the interest of organized religion to prescribe strict requirements for personal sacrifice (e.g. not being allowed to work on Sabbath, not eating during Ramadan, etc.). 

Example: THBT the media should not report on the mental health of those accused of crimes. 


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. Value Judgment: The Government's task is to prove why this statement is true, while the Opposition must demonstrate why this statement is false.

2. Perspective: Consider the debate from the viewpoint of a third-party neutral observer.

3. No Policy: Avoid proposing any policies.

4. Establish the Metric: Define the abstract terms to set the framework for the debate.


THR:

Opening: THR [Statement Y] 

Example 1: THR the societal pressure to get out of one's comfort zone. 

Example 2: THR the narrative of one true love. 


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. No policy or model is required.

2. Both teams must present a comparative analysis between two hypothetical scenarios. The Government's responsibility is to demonstrate why a world without [Statement Y] would have been more favorable, while the Opposition must argue the significance of [Statement Y] in creating a better world. Both sides will discuss the potential harms and benefits associated with [Statement Y].

3. Retrospective Motion Concept:

   - Assess the motion based on historical events: Consider what has already transpired. Utilize the advantage of hindsight—the ability to comprehend an event or situation after it has occurred.

   - The harms or benefits you attribute to [Statement Y] should have occurred in the past.

4. Counterfactual Analysis:

   - A comparison between the actual historical outcome and a hypothetical scenario where [Statement Y] did not occur. Illustrate what an alternative reality would resemble if it had evolved without the influence of [Statement Y]. 

   - Contemplate the developments that might have arisen in the absence of [Statement Y]. 

   - Substantiate your portrayal of the alternative reality with plausible reasoning. Avoid making baseless assumptions. Provide compelling reasons to support your argument.

   - Government's onus: Demonstrate why this alternative world is a superior one.

   - Opposition's onus: Argue why this alternative world is inferior.


THS/THO:

Opening: THS/THO [Statement Y]

Example: THS militant forms of Animal Rights Activism. 

Example: THO the narrative that parents should prioritize the interests of their children over their own


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. It doesn't always require a policy or model. However, if you prefer, you can provide one.

2. It's often necessary to set the lens for the debate.

3. The government's responsibility is to justify why they would support the person, group, institution, cause, idea, value, or statement expressed symbolically, materially, economically, politically, ethically, or in some other way.

4. The opposition's responsibility is to explain why support should not be given in that manner.


THP:

Opening: THP a world in which/where [Statement Y]

Example 1: THP a world in which individuals do not possess a desire to compete with one another.

Example 2: THP a world where all religious deities are seen as morally fallible.


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. No policy or model.

2. Comparison between two scenarios: a world with [Statement Y] versus the status quo.

3. Government's Responsibility:

   - Why is this statement true?

   - Why is the new world with [Statement Y] preferable to the status quo?

4. Opposition's Responsibility:

   - Why is this statement false?

   - The opposition cannot create a new alternative world to compare with [Statement Y]; they must defend the status quo.

   - Why is the status quo preferable to the new world with [Statement Y]?


ACTOR MOTIONS

Opening: This house as [X] would do [Statement Y]

Always think from the lens of the actor [X] while dealing with actor motions. There’s no ifs and buts about it. 

Value the lens of the actor [X]: his/her principles or morals, knowledge, interest, crisis, etc. 

Caution: Doing [Statement Y] might be harmful to the rest of the world. However, these debates focus on what benefits the actor [X], rather than others.

Example 1: This house as a leading LGBTQ+ advocacy group in East Asia would set up expanding awareness, acceptance, and adoption of marriage of convenience as a top priority.

Example 2: This house as a middle-class self-identifying feminist woman, would engage in and condone nepotism for personal gain.

Example 3: This house as a mother will teach her daughter that "there are no good men".


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. Prioritize the Principles of the Actor [X]: 

Each person adheres to their own set of principles, which they use to interpret and assess the world. For a Muslim, even if they recognize the need for basic rights, they may still oppose gay rights.

2. Capitalize the Value of the Actor [X]: 

   - To advocate for this value or principle, the burden lies in demonstrating its significance:

A. This actor [X] regards the principle as paramount, steadfastly upholding, adhering to, and revering it above all else.

B. Adherence to this principle brings a profound sense of fulfillment to the life of the actor [X].

   - To refute that value or principle, the burden lies in demonstrating its lack of significance:

A. In moments of crisis, this value may be subject to change. People evolve, and their perceptions and values are not immutable.

B. The individual should no longer prioritize this principle, as doing so imposes a significant burden on their life.

3. Top tips: 

   - Do not care a lot about others.

   - Do not be unrealistic.


POLICY MOTIONS

Opening: This house will/would (THW) [Statement Y]

Example 1: Info Slide – A savior sibling is a child who is conceived in order to provide an organ or cell transplant to a sibling that is affected with a fatal disease. These medical procedures are not fatal for the savior sibling. Motion – THW ban savior siblings.

Example 2: Info Slide – Political ads in which a politician or party focuses on criticizing another politician or party. Motion – THW ban negative advertising in elections. 


APPROACHING THESE MOTIONS: HOW?

1. Present a concise and pragmatic model without dwelling excessively on its details.

2. These debates typically adopt a governmental perspective, though not exclusively. The government is determining whether to enact the policy. The central question of the debate is whether the policy should be implemented as outlined by the government team.

3. Clarifications:

A. Government Fiat: These debates are not concerned with whether the government would actually implement the policy in the real world. The premise is that the government team has the authority to enact the policy as proposed, meaning it will be implemented in the manner set forth by the government bench.

B. Not solely about the metrics (good/bad) of [Statement Y]: The debate isn't just about whether [Statement Y] is good or bad. For instance, the opposition may agree that murder is wrong, but the debate centers on opposing the government’s policy of completely banning cigarettes.

4. Opposition Stance: The opposition has two main options —

A. Defend the status quo.

B. Propose a new counter-policy distinct from the status quo. Important considerations —

- It is not obligatory for the opposition to offer a counter-policy; defending the status quo is sufficient. However, presenting an alternative model can often be advantageous.

- Opposition Fiat: Similar to the government model, it is assumed that the opposition team possesses the authority to enact their proposed policy in the real world.


Authored by, 

Arunav Utpal Aritra (arunavutpal02@gmail.com)


Former Debater, NDDC GOLD

Former Debater, NDDC 1

Former Debater, IDC 1

Former President, NDDC & IDC