Abstract
The attempt to establish critical differences between the comparative advantages case and the traditional needs-plan-benefits approach to debate has been essentially an effort to legitimize one genre of argumentation at the expense of the other. As in most polemical discussions, the obvious has been shunted aside for the insignificant and trivial dissimilarities have become monumental differences. It will be the central thesis of this article that there are no meaningful differences between the comparative advantages and the traditional cases. In all things relevant to a cogent, argumentatively sound debate case the requirements, strategy, persuasiveness, and defensibility of either the comparative advantage or the traditional approach are in no way materially disparate. In fact, as we examine the two approaches we will find them to be identical in most respects.
Journal Title
Iowa Journal of Speech
Volume
1
Issue
1
First Page
13
Last Page
17
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Recommended Citation
Wittig, John W.
(1969)
"The Traditional vs The Comparative Advantages Case,"
Iowa Journal of Communication: Vol. 1:
No.
1, Article 5.
Available at:
https://scholarworks.uni.edu/ijc/vol1/iss1/5
Copyright
©1969 Iowa Journal of Speech
