This work examines and hypothesizes on the theory and practice of non-policy debating. Rather than debating about what is right, just, fair, or true, non-policy debating is about propositions of facts, quasi-facts, and values. The work is designed from and for competitive debating within popular formats currently used in para-and co-curricular settings in both secondary and higher education. Fashioned for those using competitive debating as a laboratory, Non-Policy Debating is a guide for instructors and competitors in non-policy debating. It offers tremendous value to anyone wishing to discover a calculus for reasoning about questions and resolutions of fact, quasi-fact, and value. Contents: Preface; Acknowledgements; PRE-DEBATING CONSIDERATIONS: Pre-tournament Debating Preparation; The Critique and the Audience; Resolutional Analysis; PROCEDURAL ARGUMENTATION: Non-Topicality; Subtopicality: Hasty Generalization; Subtopicality: Counter-Warrants; THE AFFIRMATIVE CASE: Affirmative Casing: Stock Issues; Affirmative Criteria; THE NEGATIVE CASE: Refuting the Case; Countercasing the Intrinsicness; Counterplanning and Fiat Theory; THE OFF-CASE: Value Objections Policy Implications; SKILLS: Cross-Examination; Debating the Big Picture; INNOVATIONS: Critical Objections; Arguing Counterfactuals; Language Critiques; References; Index.