Impact Calculus

Impact Calculus may be a technical term from Policy debate, but politicians, businessmen, and professionals of all kinds use it. In fact, we all do impact calculus whenever we make any type of decision. We decide where to eat based on the price, if we like the food, if it will be crowded, and if we’ll get food poisoning. We decide where to apply to college based on rankings, academic offerings, location, weather, tuition, and other characteristics. Every time you make a decision, you weigh many independent factors in order to come to a conclusion. You’re doing impact calculus whether you know it or not.

An impact is the effect, result, consequence, influence, significance, weight, repercussion, or outcome of an action. The impact of how much your food costs will affect if you can buy a movie ticket later, the impact of a college’s courses may mean you cannot study aeronautical engineering, even if you will get to live in a big city. Impact Calculus does not say that your opponents’ argument is wrong. Impact Calculus compares the impacts presented by competing arguments given both arguments are true.

Let’s think back to Framework, which was described as follows: Imagine the topic is a white board. If you drew a large circle on the whiteboard, the circle is like a Framework – it focuses your attention on part of the overall picture. Your arguments and your opponent’s arguments should be written within the circle in order to “fit” into the Framework.

Let’s assume the debate has reached the Rebuttal speeches. By this point in the round, the Framework should define the parameters of the debate. The Arguments have been laid out. If Framework is a circle on the white board, then Impact Calculus is the debate that occurs within that circle. If Framework works at the resolutional level, Impact Calculus works at the argumentative level. Impact Calculus begins in the Rebuttal and is most prominent in the Summary and Final Focus.

Impact Calculus (here forward IC) is a comparative analysis of arguments. It is as if two arguments are in a boxing match, while the other arguments sit on the sidelines. The possibilities of this tool, however, are much broader and greater than simple comparisons. IC takes apparent costs and benefits and determines which impact has the most importance. Rather than simply “winning” and argument, IC allows you to discuss the relative importance of the impact and explains how this implicates the overall debate.  This helps the judge choose a side when both teams persuade him or her because IC imagines that both sides are persuasive in some respect. This is where IC gains its strength. Although you will have refuted their arguments, there are many times that your direct response will not eliminate that argument for the judge. IC can cast doubt about your opponents’ argument even if your direct refutation fails. IC creates a way for the judge to see the round and make his or her decision given that both teams are making viable arguments (which is almost always the case). Allowing for your opponents’ argument to be valid or true does not mean they “win” their argument.

An effective comparison of impacts can show that even if an argument is true, your argument is more important, significant, or valuable to the context of the resolution. The “even if” structure of thought is the most effective form of IC I have found. It allows you to argue for preference, rather than correctness. Even if your opponents have a winning argument, IC explains the difference of your position and the significance of that difference. I respect a team that admits their opponents are correct and am impressed when that team illustrates how nonetheless they win. This shows the mark of a debater who wins because they win and not because their opponents lose.

Structurally, you will first explain the difference between the impacts, and then explain the significance of that difference to the round. In other words, discuss “what” is the comparative issue and “why” this comparative difference matters. IC uses the general structure of “more _____ than” or “less _____ than” to compare impacts. The type of comparison you are making will determine the _ adjective. There are three main types of comparisons you will make in IC.