What is the function of "framework" in a debate?

In a debate, the framework plays a critical role by providing criteria for evaluating arguments presented by both sides. It establishes the standards and priorities that judges and participants should consider when assessing the relative merits of the arguments made throughout the debate. This could include defining concepts, setting boundaries for the discussion, or establishing values that will guide the evaluation process.

By clearly defining what is at stake and what criteria should be used to judge the arguments, the framework helps ensure that debates are not only about the content of arguments but also about how those arguments fit within a broader context or theoretical lens. For example, a framework might prioritize utilitarian outcomes, moral considerations, or a specific legal standard, which would then guide how each argument is interpreted and weighed by judges and the audience.

The other options, while related to various aspects of debate, do not correctly capture the primary role of the framework. Emotional appeals are important but secondary to the argument structure defined by the framework. Similarly, while frameworks can influence the perception of a debate, they do not pre-determine the winner, nor do they function merely as summaries of the topics being discussed.