THE THEORY OF ISSUES

Prof. Jojo Abad, MPA

GENERAL STATEMENT
• Where there is freedom of thought and expression, there
necessarily follow differences of opinions. One person may
assert a certain fact; another may deny such as assertion.

• These differences of opinion—assertions affirmed by the

affirmative and denied by the negative—are generally called
issues.

• In our daily conversation, the word issues refers to clashes

of opinions and beliefs.
DEFINITION OF ISSUES
• In general argumentation, issues are defined as

“the inherently vital points, elements, or sub-propositions, affirmed by

the affirmative and denied by the negative, upon the establishment of
which depends the establishment of the main proposition.”

• Issues are inherent in the proposition.

• They are also vital in the sense that, unless they are established, the
main proposition cannot be established.

• To make out a prima facie case, the issues must first be established by
competent evidence, proof, or argument.
THE ISSUES IN GENERAL ARGUMENTATION

• Issues are inherent in the proposition.

• It is the task of the debaters to discover, explain, and define

the issues through logical and careful analysis.

• The audience as well as the debaters themselves will

understand the points on which opinions clash.
Other Terms Used
• Potential Issues are simply the inherently vital points involved in the
proposition that the affirmative should establish to make out a prima
facie case.
• Admitted Issues are those potential issues on which there is no
clash of opinion because they are not controverted by the negative.
• Stock Issues refer to the formulas of issues: i.e., issues that are
considered always involved in a proposition of policy.

For example: In a proposition of policy, the debater will usually consider

the ff. questions:
(1) Is the measure necessary?
(2) Will the measure be beneficial? and
(3) Is the measure practicable?
THE NECESSITY OF KNOWING THE ISSUES
READER/HEARER
• The reader who does not
comprehend precisely the
point in dispute cannot
determine the relevancy or the
irrelevancy or the logical
sufficiency or in-sufficiency of
the evidences and arguments
that are presented.
• He is likely to get confused
and, therefore, cannot follow
the progress of the debate.
ARGUER/DEBATER
• He may waste his time and
energy proving some fact that
will not help in establishing his
case.
• He may be surprised by an
attack on some vital point.
• He may fail to appreciate the
relevancy of the evidence and
arguments that he may
adduce.
• He will likely confuse them.
THE AFFIRMATIVE AND NEGATIVE

• In policy debate, the affirmative is the team which affirms

the resolution. The affirmative side speaks in support of the
topic.

• The affirmative team will have a plan that they are

advocating for that should be within the resolution. For
example, if the resolution was that the government should
increase regulation of education, a plan might be that the
government should ban the use of zero tolerance policies in
schools.
THE AFFIRMATIVE AND NEGATIVE
• The affirmative side has a right to make any
reasonable definition of the terms of the
proposition. Their goal is to persuade others that
the topic is true.

• The affirmative side speaks first and last.

• The negative side refutes the affirmation or speaks

against the topic. Their goal is to persuade others
that the topic is not true.
THE DUTIES OF THE AFFIRMATIVE
• The affirmative must establish all the issues, unless
the negative admits one or some of them.

• If the affirmative fails to prove any one of the

issues, he loses the case.

• As he fails thus to make out a prima facie case, the

negative has no obligation to present any evidence
in his defense.
THE DUTIES OF THE NEGATIVE
JOINING THE ISSUES

• The process of determining what issues are

admitted and what issues are denied.

• He may admit all the issues except one and fight

the affirmative on this remaining one.
THE ISSUES AND WINNING OR
LOSING IN CONTEST DEBATES
• A contest debate is not decided on the merits of the case—neither in the
strength of the evidence presented nor on the strength of the arguments
adduced.

• It is decided on the basis of the ability of the debaters—i.e., their

reasoning, their analysis of the question, the quality of their language,
their application of the rules of argumentation and debate as an art, their
ability to talk to an audience, and the measure of preparation they
demonstrate.

• The affirmative may fail to establish a prima facie and yet win the
debate.
ISSUES AND PARTITION
ISSUES

• Are the vital points involved in a proposition that the

affirmative must establish his case.
• Issues are always vital.

PARTITION

• Is the term used to designate the statement of the main

points to taken up in the course of the discussion.
• The points in partition must be important, but not necessarily
vital.
END OF PRESENTATION