Understanding the Resolution

Listen to the short podcast episode here (6:22)

Every Lincoln-Douglas debate starts with a resolution. This is the statement you and your opponent will argue for or against. The resolution is not a question. It’s a claim- something that can be affirmed or negated. Your job is to prove why it is (or isn’t) true.

Take these two resolutions from the National Speech and Debate Association:

• Resolved: The United States ought to become party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and/or the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. (January/February 2025)
• Resolved: The development of Artificial General Intelligence is immoral. (March/April 2025)

At first glance, these might seem overwhelming. They involve international law, artificial intelligence, and moral philosophy. But every resolution can be broken down into key parts, making it easier to understand.

Step 1: Identify the Key Terms

Resolutions often use words that require clarification. If a judge doesn’t understand the terms the way you do, your argument might not make sense to them. Let’s take the second resolution as an example:

• Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - This refers to AI that can think, learn, and adapt like a human. It’s different from the AI we use today, which is specialized for specific tasks.
• Immoral - This is the heart of the debate. What does it mean for something to be immoral? Does it mean it causes harm? Violates rights? Goes against human dignity? Defining morality will shape your entire argument.

If you fail to define these terms, your opponent will. And they might define them in a way that makes it harder for you to win.

Step 2: Spot the Value Conflict

LD debate is all about competing values. Look at the first resolution:

• Should the U.S. prioritize sovereignty (the right to govern itself) or global cooperation (working with international organizations for the greater good)?
• Is justice best served by international courts or by allowing nations to handle their own legal issues?

The values in conflict help frame the debate. Instead of arguing over random facts, you’ll be making a case for why one value should take priority over another.

Step 3: Rephrase the Resolution as a Question

Resolutions are written formally, but thinking of them as questions can help.

Instead of: The development of Artificial General Intelligence is immoral.

Ask: Should we stop developing AGI because it is morally wrong?

Instead of: The U.S. ought to become party to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and/or the Rome Statute of the ICC.

Ask: Does the U.S. have a moral obligation to join these international agreements?

By reframing the resolution, you focus on the actual debate rather than just memorizing words.

The Bottom Line

Before you argue, you need to understand what you’re arguing about. Breaking down the resolution into key terms, value conflicts, and simple questions will give you a head start before the round even begins.