Impact Calculus

Weber & Short

Overview

Policy Framework: Magnitude Probability Timeframe

Kritikal Framework: Systemic Harms

Using evidence to generate linksBeginning with the end in mind

Magnitude

How large are your harms? How many people/animals/biospheres are affected? This

is sometimes called scope. How much are they affected? What’s the terminal

impact? Framework: How would/should the judge weigh this

calculation against opponent harms? You can usually get to a large magnitude through a

large, often improbable I/L chain, but consider the tradeoff with other advs/DAs

Advantages: Risk of the Link Disadvantages: Unlikely (low probability),

Catastrophizing turns

Probability

How likely are the impacts to occur? Link specificity key to determine and compare this

with competing advs/DAs High probability is usually derived from specific

scenarios in the cards, scientific or statistical epistemologies, high probability semantics from field experts

Advantages: Great time tradeoff (good research does the trick—make link books)

Disadvantages: Usually needs to be weighed with other considerations

Timeframe

How soon do the harms/impacts occur? Usually get T/F through specific link scenarios and

historical/empirical epistemologies Advantages: Among equals, sooner is more persuasive Disadvantages: Predictive or political language of

historical readings can kill probability (monkeys throwing darts—looking at you, ptix)

Systemic Impacts

Problems inherent in the status quo Because K’s are non-unique, it becomes more difficult

to explain case-specific causation, leading to a more difficult probability, magnitude, and timeframe story

Framework/role of the ballot helps focus discussion down onto in-round impacts Discourse key Rejection key Individual Advocacy key

Don’t box yourself in unnecessarily: CP as alt (strategic choice: the policy/K link turn switcharoo)

Comparative Analysis

Impact Calc isn’t just “M x P x T”: it’s all about comparison shopping

Some questions: Which is more persuasive: a 100% chance of a small

impact (e.g. education) in the present or a 1% chance of a large impact (e.g. ‘splosions) far in the future?

How would you determine probability in a card that doesn’t give you a specific calculation? What about timeframe? Magnitude?

How would you reconcile the differences between policy and systemic impacts? (cede the political v. discourse; pre- v. post-fiat; etc.)

Using evidence to generate I/C links

Specificity of Links: case-specific links grant higher probability than generics

Semantic Differences: will v. may, etc.Competing Epistemologies:

Scientific/Statistical Empirical/Historical Ideological/Theoretical Opinion (a la PTIX)

Causality: Uniqueness, Brink, Isolation of Variables

Beginning with the end in mind

Setting up 2NR calculus in constructions (especially the 1AC; although undercovering in the 1 is a good strat, too, if you want to push them into a specific argument): “Now K/T…”: Need a unique scenario that pushes T/F

into the present Impact calc/weigh ____ first/framework: Explains why

your advantages should be considered first when making decisions

Case-specific links: comparing probability vs. “risk of the link”