In past policy theory models, Inherency was the Argument With Many Faces. It was used in a wide variety of ways. The definition we liked best was:

Inherency asks: “Are the Plan and the Status Quo mutually exclusive?”

Inherency was uplifted to the level of a stock issue. This created a variety of problems.

1. Ultra rare. Genuine inherency problems - like the affirmative proposing a Plan that was passed six months ago - are incredibly rare. They only happen when the affirmative is extraordinarily lazy (and runs a case they didn’t research) or extraordinarily unlucky (and their Plan is passed right before the round). They’re so rare that if you get to run Inherency, you’ll probably be telling that story for years to come.

2. Spawns nonsense. Examining inherency as a stock issue complicates something simple. We start using nonsense phrases like “inherent to the resolution.” Inherency is introduced in affirmative cases as the first half of a harm - sometimes even with evidence and impacts. Some negatives would say that the affirmative had a burden to prove that the Plan won’t be passed. This sort of thing only happens because presenting inherency as a stock issue makes people think they should cast their net in it.

3. Confusing. What if the Plan is going to be passed in six months? What about tomorrow? What if it will probably be passed? What if something similar was passed, but the Plan has some differences? What about subcategories like attitudinal inherency? These aren’t actually difficult questions, but thinking in terms of Inherency makes them difficult.

It is almost always a mistake to run Inherency. This is particularly harmful for novices who are taught stock issue theory. They have to work to wrap their mind around a confusing concept that will be probably be irrelevant for their entire first year of competition. If they do use it, they’ll be worse off for it.

Gamers know this kind of problem as a “noob trap.” It’s like an expensive sword that does no damage. Experienced players know not to use it, but new players assume that, since it’s expensive, it must be good.

It’s time to say goodbye.

In the next post, we’ll offer some alternatives.