| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,24 @@ |
|
1 |
+3 |
|
2 |
+Framework |
|
3 |
+The meta-ethic is procedural moral realism. |
|
4 |
+This entails that moral facts stem from procedures while substantive realism holds that moral truths exist independently of that in the empirical world. Prefer procedural realism – |
|
5 |
+1 Collapses – the only way to verify whether something is a moral fact is by using procedures to warrant it. |
|
6 |
+2 Uncertainty – our experiences are inaccessible to others which allows people to say they don’t experience the same, however a priori principles are universally applied to all agents. |
|
7 |
+3 Is/Ought Gap – we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. It’s impossible to derive an ought statement from descriptive facts about the world, necessitating a priori premises. |
|
8 |
+Regress – I can keep asking “why should I follow this” which results in skep since obligations are predicated on ignorantly accepting rules. Only reason solves since asking “why reason?” requires reason which is self-justified. |
|
9 |
+That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends. |
|
10 |
+Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. |
|
11 |
+Prefer – |
|
12 |
+1 Performativity—freedom is the key to the process of justification of arguments. Willing that we should abide by their ethical theory presupposes that we own ourselves in the first place. |
|
13 |
+2 All other frameworks collapse—non-Kantian theories source obligations in extrinsically good objects, but that presupposes the goodness of the rational will. |
|
14 |
+3 Necessity—my framework is inherent to the way we set ends. Ethics must be necessary and not contingent since otherwise its claims could be escapable. Necessary truths outweigh on probability—if a necessary truth is possible that means it’s true in a possible world, but that implies it’s true in all worlds since that’s what necessity is, so they have to prove there’s 0 risk of my framework. |
|
15 |
+4 TJFs and they outweigh since it precludes engagement on the framework layer – prefer for Resource disparities- Our framework ensures big squads don’t have a comparative advantage since debates become about quality of arguments rather than quantity - their model crowds out small schools because they have to prep for every unique advantage under each aff, every counterplan, and every disad with carded responses to each of them |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+ |
|
18 |
+Offense |
|
19 |
+1 The process of strike uses patients or beneficiaries of work as a means to an end |
|
20 |
+Howard 20 Danielle Howard,, Mar 2020, "What Should Physicians Consider Prior to Unionizing?," Journal of Ethics | American Medical Association, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/what-should-physicians-consider-prior-unionizing/2020-03 // LEX JB |
|
21 |
+- Written in the context of doctors, warrant can be used for all jobs |
|
22 |
+The possible disadvantage to patients highlights the crux of the moral issue of physician strikes. In Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, one formulation of the categorical imperative is to “Act in such a way as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of anyone else, always as an end and never merely as a means.”24 When patient care is leveraged by physicians during strikes, patients serve as a means to the union’s ends. Unless physicians act to improve everyone’s care, union action—if it jeopardizes the care of some hospitalized patients, for example—cannot be ethical. It is for this reason that, in the case of physicians looking to form a new union, the argument can be made that unionization should be used only as a last resort. Physician union members must be prepared to utilize collective action and accept its risks to patient care, but every effort should be made to avoid actions that risk harm to patients. |
|
23 |
+2 Going on strike isn’t universalizable – a) if everyone leaves work then there will be no concept of a job b) everyone means the employer even leaves which is a contradiction in contraception |
|
24 |
+3 No aff offense – no unique obligation of the state to give ability to strike – if a workplace is coercive you can use legal means or just find another job |