This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Neelix (talk | contribs) at 00:29, 22 August 2008 (Added distinguishing link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:29, 22 August 2008 by Neelix (talk | contribs) (Added distinguishing link)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Not to be confused with inherence.| Policy debate |
|---|
| Organization |
| Format |
| Argument types |
 Policy debate |
Inherency is a stock issue in policy debate that refers to a barrier that keeps a harm from being solved in the status quo.
There are three main types of inherency:
- Structural inherency: Laws or other barriers to the implementation of the plan.
- Attitudinal inherency: Beliefs or attitudes which prevent the implementation of the plan.
- Existential inherency: The plan hasn't happened yet.
Despite the classification of these three as the "main types" of inherency, the existence of other types are subject to theory (much like a substantial part of the lexicon for the event). In higher level policy debate inherency has become a non issue. Many judges will not vote on it, and negative teams do not run it often because it contradicts uniqueness on disadvantages.
This speech and debate-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |
 | This article about politics is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |