| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple Valley | 1 | Byram Hills AK | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| Apple Valley | 3 | Eagan WW | Alex Baldwin |
|
|
| |
| Apple Valley | 6 | Marlborough TZ | Noah Gallagher |
|
|
| |
| Badgerland | 2 | Neenah IH | Lisa Kahler |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 2 | Lake Highland Prep AVe | Jackson DeConCini |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 4 | Lexington EY | James Stuckert |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 5 | Bellarmine AK | Ronak Dua |
|
|
| |
| Grapevine | 4 | Northland Christian LB | Chris Castillo |
|
|
| |
| Grapevine | 2 | Murrah PH | Wyatt Hatfield |
|
|
| |
| Jack Howe | Doubles | Homestead SL | Abhishek Rao, Asher Towner, Joseph Barquin |
|
|
| |
| Jack Howe | 2 | James Logan AD | Jason Yang |
|
|
| |
| Jack Howe | 3 | Christopher Columbus NG | Matt Contreras |
|
|
| |
| Jack Howe | 6 | Dougherty Valley TM | Victoria Yonter |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 3 | Harvard Weslake JH | Sim Guerrero |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 5 | Taft EL | James Stuckert |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 5 | Taft EL | James Stuckert |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 1 | Bergen County Academies AK | Abhinav Sinha |
|
|
| |
| Nano Nagle | 4 | Marlborough VA | Joseph Barquin |
|
|
| |
| Nano Nagle | 2 | Marlborough LF | Ben Cortez |
|
|
| |
| Nano Nagle | 5 | Archbishop Mitty SB | Maxine Adams |
|
|
| |
| New York City Invitational | 1 | Lexington AR | Fabrice Etienne |
|
|
| |
| New York City Invitational | 3 | Montville RP | Ben Cortez |
|
|
| |
| New York City Invitational | 6 | American Heritage Broward MC | Jalyn Wu |
|
|
| |
| TOC | Octas | You | Me |
|
| ||
| TOC | Triples | You | Me |
|
| ||
| TOC | Quads | You | Me |
|
| ||
| This One | 1 | You | Someone |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Apple Valley | 1 | Opponent: Byram Hills AK | Judge: Breigh Plat 1AC - Korsgaard AC Climate ADV Eval after 1AC |
| Apple Valley | 3 | Opponent: Eagan WW | Judge: Alex Baldwin 1AC - Indopak AC Disclosure |
| Apple Valley | 6 | Opponent: Marlborough TZ | Judge: Noah Gallagher 1AC - Petit |
| Badgerland | 2 | Opponent: Neenah IH | Judge: Lisa Kahler 1AC - Korsgaard AC Democracy Adv Climate Change Adv |
| Blue Key | 2 | Opponent: Lake Highland Prep AVe | Judge: Jackson DeConCini 1AC - Korsgaard Climate Advantage |
| Blue Key | 4 | Opponent: Lexington EY | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC - Korsgaard IVI |
| Blue Key | 5 | Opponent: Bellarmine AK | Judge: Ronak Dua 1AC - Util Aff Democracy Adv |
| Grapevine | 4 | Opponent: Northland Christian LB | Judge: Chris Castillo 1AC - Korsgaard Indopak Adv |
| Grapevine | 2 | Opponent: Murrah PH | Judge: Wyatt Hatfield 1AC - Korsgaard Indopak Adv |
| Jack Howe | Doubles | Opponent: Homestead SL | Judge: Abhishek Rao, Asher Towner, Joseph Barquin 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Jack Howe | 2 | Opponent: James Logan AD | Judge: Jason Yang 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Jack Howe | 3 | Opponent: Christopher Columbus NG | Judge: Matt Contreras 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Jack Howe | 6 | Opponent: Dougherty Valley TM | Judge: Victoria Yonter 1AC - Korsgaard Consult Bad Theory Covid Adv |
| Loyola | 3 | Opponent: Harvard Weslake JH | Judge: Sim Guerrero 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Loyola | 5 | Opponent: Taft EL | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Loyola | 5 | Opponent: Taft EL | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC - Korsgaard Covid Adv |
| Loyola | 1 | Opponent: Bergen County Academies AK | Judge: Abhinav Sinha 1AC - Korsgaard Indopak Adv |
| Nano Nagle | 4 | Opponent: Marlborough VA | Judge: Joseph Barquin 1AC - Korsgaard WTO Credibility Adv Covid Adv |
| Nano Nagle | 2 | Opponent: Marlborough LF | Judge: Ben Cortez 1AC - Korsgaard WTO Cred Adv Covid Adv |
| Nano Nagle | 5 | Opponent: Archbishop Mitty SB | Judge: Maxine Adams 1AC - Korsgaard WTO Cred Adv Covid Adv |
| New York City Invitational | 1 | Opponent: Lexington AR | Judge: Fabrice Etienne 1AC - Whole res Covid adv Cred Adv |
| New York City Invitational | 3 | Opponent: Montville RP | Judge: Ben Cortez 1AC - Korsgaard AC WTO Credibility Adv Covid Adv |
| New York City Invitational | 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward MC | Judge: Jalyn Wu 1AC - Korsgaard |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Accessibility FormattingTournament: This One | Round: 1 | Opponent: You | Judge: Someone DISCLAIMER - I am not asking you to do this for every round, or make this a huge norm, unless you want to. Formatting it makes it easier for me to comprehend and is much appreciated. If you don't I might run theory. If you would like me to do the same, please ask me preround or have it disclosed on your wiki. This section is a rundown on some quick tips and tricks on how to more easily create accessibly formatted speech docs. Please try to follow these instructions. (This how-to applies to Verbatim) | 10/30/21 |
0 - Contact InformationTournament: TOC | Round: Quads | Opponent: You | Judge: Me | 10/4/21 |
0 - Content WarningTournament: TOC | Round: Octas | Opponent: You | Judge: Me | 10/4/21 |
0 - NavigationTournament: TOC | Round: Triples | Opponent: You | Judge: Me | 10/4/21 |
1 - First 3 Last 3Tournament: Apple Valley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Eagan WW | Judge: Alex Baldwin TheoryA. Interpretation: Debaters must disclose all previously read positions before the debate on their NDCA wiki page under their own name with full citations, tags, and first three/last three words.B. Violation: You didn’t – you don’t even have a wikiC. Standards:1. Evidence Quality – Disclosure generates an information database that encourages debaters to find the best evidence on the topic. Key to education since we have better debates with better arguments.Nails 13 ~(Jacob, NDT Policy Debater at Georgia State University), "A Defense of Disclosure (Including Third Party Disclosure)",NSDUpdate,10/10/2013EM~ 2. Quality engagement —- disclosure allows in-depth preparation before the round which checks back against unpredictable positions and allows debaters to effectively write case negs and blocks. Not just in the context of this round, but for rounds in general. Quality engagement is an independent voter because the constitutive reason we debate is to engage and clash our arguments otherwise we would just be doing oratory. It’s also key to fairness since I need to have prep to win. This means vote on inclusion since debaters of lower skill level can have a chance to engage with better debaters which makes debate less centered towards those with larger coaching staffs.3. Academic Ethics —- disclosure deters mis-cutting, power-tagging, abuse of brackets and ellipses, and plagiarism. This is an independent reason to vote you down because it promotes better norms about academic engagement—-debate is an academic environment and must ensure that we become fair scholars. Even if you don’t lose on fairness in the round, you will lose in college if you violate academic ethics which establish a crucial real-world norm, and outweighs any in-round impact.Framing: You can’t coopt any of the reasons why procedurals are bad in the context of the affirmative since I don’t constrain your ability to read it– the contention is that this aff should’ve been read, just disclosed. Also, your prep outs argument is nonsense a) prep outs are a 2 way street b) they’re good as per the shell c) being a good debater solves back.Fairness and education are voters – its how judges evaluate rounds and why schools fund debateNeg theory is DTD - 1ARs control the direction of the debate because it determines what the 2NR has to go for – DTD allows us some leeway in the round by having some control in the directionCompeting interps – Reasonability invites arbitrary judge intervention and a race to the bottom of questionable argumentation – it also collapses since brightlines operate on an offense-defense paradigmNo RVIs – A – Going all in on theory kills substance education which outweighs on timeframe B - Discourages checking real abuse which outweighs on norm-setting C – Encourages theory baiting – outweighs because if the shell is frivolous, they can beat it quickly D – its illogical for you to win for proving you were fair – outweighs since logic is a litmus test for other arguments E - Kills norm setting since debaters can never admit they’re wrong – outweighs since norm setting is the constitutive purpose of theory F – They are the logic of criminalization that over-punish people-of-color for trying to create productive discoursefairness | 11/6/21 |
2 - FW - UtilTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Eagan WW | Judge: Alex Baldwin UtilThe standard is maximizing expected well-being.1~ Only pleasure and pain are intrinsically valuable – all other frameworks collapse.Moen 16 ~Ole Martin Moen, Research Fellow in Philosophy at University of Oslo "An Argument for Hedonism" Journal of Value Inquiry (Springer), 50 (2) 2016: 267–281~ TDI AND places where we reach the end of the line in matters of value. 2~ Extinction first —- moral uncertainty.Bostrom 12 ~(Nick Bostrom, Faculty of Philosophy and Oxford Martin School University of Oxford) "Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority." Global Policy, 2012~ TDI AND of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe. 3~ Actor specificity: A~ Governments must aggregate since every policy benefit some and harms others, which also means side constraints freeze action. B~ States lack wills or intentions since policies are collective actions. C~ Actor-specificity comes first since different agents have different ethical standings. | 11/6/21 |
2 - ROB - Truth TestingTournament: Grapevine | Round: 2 | Opponent: Murrah PH | Judge: Wyatt Hatfield | 10/9/21 |
2 - ROB - Truth Testing v2Tournament: Apple Valley | Round: 6 | Opponent: Marlborough TZ | Judge: Noah Gallagher TTThe role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement.~1~ Constitutivism: The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic – five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it’s constitutive and jurisdictional – that’s a meta constraint on anything else since the judge voting aff if they affirm better and neg the contrary proves that it’s an independent voter means hack against them if they contest it.~2~ Fairness: Anything new moots 6 minutes of the AC and exacerbates neg reactivity advantage so I should be able to compensate by choosing. They justify substantive skews since there will always be a more correct side of the issue but we compensate for flaws in the lit.~3~ Inclusivity: Other ROBs open the door for personal lives to factor into decisions to compare who is more oppressed causing violence. Only we allow anything as long is it proves the res true or false but the judge can stop if its violent. Also if I’m textual I’m fair since the resolution is the only predictable stasis point. | 11/6/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - DemocracyTournament: Blue Key | Round: 5 | Opponent: Bellarmine AK | Judge: Ronak Dua Advantage 1Global democracy is collapsing now.Freedom House 3/3 ~Freedom House. Freedom House works to defend human rights and promote democratic change, with a focus on political rights and civil liberties. We act as a catalyst for freedom through a combination of analysis, advocacy, and action. Our analysis, focused on 13 central issues, is underpinned by our international program work. "New Report: The global decline in democracy has accelerated". 3-3-2021. . https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-global-decline-democracy-has-accelerated.~~ AND environments investigated government transgressions, and activists persisted in calling out undemocratic practices. The plan solves:First, civic engagement – strikes increase democratic participation which reinvigorates democracy.McElwee 15 ~Sean; Research Associate at Demos; "How Unions Boost Democratic Participation," The American Prospect; 9/16/15; https://prospect.org/labor/unions-boost-democratic-participation/~~ AND a broad swath of the middle class largely unrepresented in the political process." Second, corruption reduction – the right to strike fights concentration of power while reducing inequality.IER 17 ~Institute of Employment Rights. The IER exists to inform the debate around trade union rights and labour law by providing information, critical analysis, and policy ideas through our network of academics, researchers and lawyers. "UN Rights Expert: Right to strike is essential to democracy". 3-10-2017. . https://www.ier.org.uk/news/un-rights-expert-right-strike-essential-democracy/.~~ AND this right, and a negative obligation not to interfere with its exercise." Democratic backsliding causes extinction.Kendall-Taylor 16 ~Andrea; Deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, Senior associate in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington; "How Democracy’s Decline Would Undermine the International Order," CSIS; 7/15/16; https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-democracyE28099s-decline-would-undermine-international-order/~~ AND policy, but it would ensure that we are having the right conversation. Evolution proves our theory trueJohnson and Thayer 16 – Dominic D. P. Johnson, D.Phil., Ph.D.* and Bradley A. Thayer, Ph.D., "The evolution of offensive realism Survival under anarchy from the Pleistocene to the present," https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/56B778004187F70B8E59609BE7FEE7A4/S073093841600006Xa.pdf/div-class-title-the-evolution-of-offensive-realism-div.pdf AND in which human brains and behaviors evolved. But what was that context? SolvencyPlan text: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike. CX checks theory interps to avoid frivolous debates – otherwise I get an I meet.Definition of unconditional right to strike:NLRB 85 ~National Labor Relations Board; "Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947: Volume 1," Jan 1985; https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=7o1tA''v4xwCandrdid=book-7o1tA''v4xwCandrdot=1~~ AND health and welfare of our people in order to attain a selfish end. Enforcement through IFAs is normal means – that solves credibility concerns and legal loopholes which encourages striking.Neill 12 ~Emily CM; "The Right to Strike: How the United States Reduces it to the Freedom to Strike and How International Framework Agreements can Redeem it," 1/1/12; Labor and Employment Law Forum Volume 2 Issue 2 Article 6; https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/andhttpsredir=1andarticle=1047andcontext=lelb~~ AND for workers, but not one afforded the status of a protected right. FWThe standard is maximizing expected well-being. Our framework is only concerned with minimizing death. Calc indicts don’t link—my framework evaluates offense—climate change is bad because as far as we know, is would cause suffering.~1~ Death outweighs— ~a~ agents can’t act if they fear for their bodily security—my framework constrains every NC and K and ~b~ it’s the worst form of evilPaterson 3 – Department of Philosophy, Providence College, Rhode Island (Craig, "A Life Not Worth Living?", Studies in Christian Ethics. AND the person, the very source and condition of all human possibility.82 Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this – meta theory also precedes the evaluation of initial theory shells because it determines whether or not I could engage in theory in the first place. 1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished and no 2NR paradigm issues, theory, or RVIs because you have 6 minutes to go for them whereas I only have a 3 minute 2AR to respond so I get crushed on time skew.~2~ Methodological pluralism is necessary to any sustainable critique, which justifies permutations to any K – we impact turn your notion of "severance" or "exclusivity".Bleiker 14 – (6/17, Roland, Professor of International Relations at the University of Queensland, "International Theory Between Reification and Self-Reflective Critique," International Studies Review, Volume 16, Issue 2, pages 325–327) AND and complexity theory—links that could have been explored in more detail. ~3~ Movements which refuse engagement with the state get co-opted by the ruling class – engagement is a necessity.Boggs 97 ~Carl Boggs, National University. "The great retreat: Decline of the public sphere in late twentieth-century America." Theory and Society, Volume 26, Number 6, December 1997.~ A ClassicThe decline of the public sphere in late twentieth-century America poses a series of great dilemmas and challenges. Many ideological currents scrutinized here – localism, metaphysics, spontaneism, post-modernism, Deep Ecology – intersect with and reinforce each other. While these currents have deep origins in popular movements of the 1960s and 1970s, they remain very much alive in the 1990s. Despite their different outlooks and trajectories, they all share one thing in common: a depoliticized expression of struggles to combat and overcome alienation. The false sense of empowerment that comes with such mesmerizing impulses is accompanied by a loss of public engagement, an erosion of citizenship and a depleted capacity of individuals in large groups to work for social change. As this ideological quagmire worsens, urgent problems that are destroying the fabric of American society will go unsolved – perhaps even unrecognized – only to fester more ominously in the future. And such problems (ecological crisis, poverty, urban decay, spread of infectious diseases, technological displacement of workers) cannot be understood outside the larger social and global context of internationalized markets, finance, and communications. Paradoxically, the widespread retreat from politics, often inspired by localist sentiment, comes at a time when agendas that ignore or sidestep these global realities will, more than ever, be reduced to impotence. In his commentary on the state of citizenship today, Wolin refers to the increasing sublimation and dilution of politics, as larger numbers of people turn away from public concerns toward private ones. By diluting the life of common involvements, we negate the very idea of politics as a source of public ideals and visions. 74 In the meantime, the fate of the world hangs in the balance. The unyielding truth is that, even as the ethos of anti-politics becomes more compelling and even fashionable in the United States, it is the vagaries of political power that will continue to decide the fate of human societies. This last point demands further elaboration. The shrinkage of politics hardly means that corporate colonization will be less of a reality, that social hierarchies will somehow disappear, or that gigantic state and military structures will lose their hold over people’s lives. Far from it: the space abdicated by a broad citizenry, well-informed and ready to participate at many levels, can in fact be filled by authoritarian and reactionary elites – an already familiar dynamic in many lesser-developed countries. The fragmentation and chaos of a Hobbesian world, not very far removed from the rampant individualism, social Darwinism, and civic violence that have been so much a part of the American landscape, could be the prelude to a powerful Leviathan designed to impose order in the face of disunity and atomized retreat. In this way the eclipse of politics might set the stage for a reassertion of politics in more virulent guise – or it might help further rationalize the existing power structure. In either case, the state would likely become what Hobbes anticipated: the embodiment of those universal, collective interests that had vanished from civil society. 75 ~4~ Our method is the opposite of reformism – it doesn’t buy into sweeping narratives that conflate change with progress nor expand or validate legal institutions – rather, it’s a contingent intervention that materially reduces violence, while exposing that the alleged facial neutrality of law is a key vector for racialized violenceSpade 13 ~Dean Spade, associate professor of law @ Seattle University, "Intersectional Resistance and Law Reform" Signs Vol. 38, No. 4, Summer 2013~ AND to lead inquiry and experimentation into transformative social justice theory and practice.15 ====~5~ Working within the state functions to expose hidden oppression and to fully understand the state – we’re a prerequisite to the kritik.==== | 10/30/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - IndoPakTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Eagan WW | Judge: Alex Baldwin Plan Text: Resolved: Just governments ought to recognize an unconditional right to strike.IndiaAdvantage one is indiaIndian journalist strikes get arrested now.Guardian 20 ~Guardian, 7-31-2020, "India arrests dozens of journalists in clampdown on critics of Covid-19 response," https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jul/31/india-arrests-50-journalists-in-clampdown-on-critics-of-covid-19-response JB~ AND that tend to portray bad picture about ‘Freedom of Press’ in India." A broader system of democratic backsliding hit India the hardest – COVID’s second wave was caused through governmental failure and lack of democracy.Singh 7/5 ~Prerna Singh, July 5, 2021 at 5:00 a.m., "India has become an ‘electoral autocracy.’ Its covid-19 catastrophe is no surprise", https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/05/india-has-become-an-electoral-autocracy-its-covid-19-catastrophe-is-no-surprise JB recut by Lex AKo~ AND to take action. This would have likely reduced the public health tragedy. That’s prompted by lack of journalistic freedom which causes IndoPak escalation.Somos 20 ~Christy Somos, December 17, 2020, "COVID-19 has escalated armed conflict in India, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and the Philippines, study finds," https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/covid-19-has-escalated-armed-conflict-in-india-pakistan-iraq-libya-and-the-philippines-study-finds-1.5236738 JB Recut by Lex AKo~ AND crisis, which saw an increase of attacks by Taliban groups in May. Extinction – first strike and fallout blocks the sunRoblin 21. ~(Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in Conflict Resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China, "If the Next India-Pakistan War Goes Nuclear, It Will Destroy the World," The National Interest, March 26, 2021. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/if-next-india-pakistan-war-goes-nuclear-it-will-destroy-world-181134~~ TDI AND New Delhi and Islamabad work together to change the nature of their relationship. The plan solves:First, corruption reduction – the right to strike fights concentration of power while reducing inequality.IER 17 ~Institute of Employment Rights. The IER exists to inform the debate around trade union rights and labour law by providing information, critical analysis, and policy ideas through our network of academics, researchers and lawyers. "UN Rights Expert: Right to strike is essential to democracy". 3-10-2017. . https://www.ier.org.uk/news/un-rights-expert-right-strike-essential-democracy/.~~ AND this right, and a negative obligation not to interfere with its exercise." Second, electoral legitimacy – striking is critical to political influence which can check electoral illegitimacy and broader fascism.Luce 20 ~Stephanie; Professor, received her B.A. in economics from the University of California, Davis and both her Ph.D in Sociology and her M.A. in Industrial Relations from the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Her research focuses on low-wage work, globalization and labor standards, and labor-community coalitions. She is the author of Labor Movements: Global Perspectives. Well-known for her research on living wage campaigns and movements, she is also the author of Fighting for a Living Wage and co-author (with Robert Pollin) of The Living Wage: Building a Fair Economy. She is co-author of A Measure of Fairness; and co-editor of What Works for Workers?: Public Policies and Innovative Strategies for Low-Wage Workers. She has published numerous reports on labor and wages in the New York City area, including the annual "State of the Unions" report co-authored with Ruth Milkman; "Strike for Democracy!" 10/26/20; OrgUP; https://www.organizingupgrade.com/strike-for-democracy/~~ AND don’t teach strikes, we don’t talk the language of strikes in labor." Strong democracy is key to preventing nuclear war – collapse is worse and turns every impactKendall-Taylor 16 ~Andrea; Deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, Senior associate in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington; "How Democracy’s Decline Would Undermine the International Order," CSIS; 7/15/16; https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-democracyE28099s-decline-would-undermine-international-order/~~ AND to the tremendous costs of peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, and refugee flows. Third, civic engagement – strikes increase democratic participation which reinvigorates democracy.McElwee 15 ~Sean; Research Associate at Demos; "How Unions Boost Democratic Participation," The American Prospect; 9/16/15; https://prospect.org/labor/unions-boost-democratic-participation/~~ AND a broad swath of the middle class largely unrepresented in the political process." Independently, our coordinated civic engagement is key to comprehensive climate action globally.Fisher and Nasrin 20 ~Dana R; Professor of Sociology and the Director of the Program for Society and the Environment at the University of Maryland. Her research focuses on questions related to democracy, activism, and environmentalism — most recently studying climate activism, protests, and the American Resistance. Her research employs a mixed-methods approach that integrates data collected through open-ended semi-structured interviews and participant observation with various forms of survey data; Sohana; University of Maryland, College Park, UMD, UMCP, University of Maryland College Park · Philip Merrill College of Journalism Master of Arts; "Climate activism and its effects," Wiley Interdisciplinary Review; October 2020; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345455893'Climate'activism'and'its'effects~~ AND they connect Statistics prove.Looney 16 ~Robert Looney, JUNE 1, 2016, "Democracy Is the Answer to Climate Change", https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/01/democracy-is-the-answer-to-climate-change JB~ AND author could suggest was a relative lack of public discussion of climate change. Climate change causes extinction.Specktor 19 ~Brandon; writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years; "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, 6/4/19; https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html~~ AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." | 11/6/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - KorsgaardTournament: Blue Key | Round: 2 | Opponent: Lake Highland Prep AVe | Judge: Jackson DeConCini 1AC r2Neg… lets make a trade, you have a choice – you can solve this math equation and read the answer in the 1N and ill conceded permissibility and presumption negates
If you solve this one I’ll concede terminal defense to my advantage 2
Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Ethics must begin apriori –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral. Also, proving an obligation under any index is sufficient to affirm because there isn’t a higher-up framework to weigh theories under which means that you can only disprove a framework from the perspective of another and an obligation under one framework isn’t incompatible with a possibly stronger obligation under another framework.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.mes~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others~b~ Degrees of wrongness – only apriori allows for weighing between morality i.e perfect and imperfect duties, positive and negative obligations, while util can’t explain how to weigh between competing infinite obligations like extinction. That justifies the doublebind – either we can weigh and extinction first logic is incoherent or we can’t and util is incoherent.~c~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike.Offense~1~ Right to Strike defends liberty for workers to both set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion from external actors, Gourevitch ’18:Gourevitch, Alex. "A Radical Defense of the Right to Strike." Jacobin 2018. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/right-to-strike-freedom-civil-liberties-oppression AND for the right to strike is to prioritize democratic freedoms over property rights. ~2~ Regardless of the effectiveness of strikes, they are a form of setting and pursuing ends and the omnilateral will has the obligation to protect the right to do so – anything else is a form of the government restricting freedom~3~ The right to strike is consistent with negative rights – otherwise it requires direct government intervention to break the negotiation process that is already skewed towards employers, Sheppard ’96:Terry Sheppard, "Liberalism and the Charter: Freedom of Association and the Right to Strike" (1996) 5 Dal J Leg Stud 117. Yoaks AND of Canada's major political parties have a great track record on protecting unions. ~4~ Right to strike ensures a process of collective bargaining – absent a right to strike it would literally force workers to work against their will, violating freedom, Croucher ’11:Croucher, Richard, Mark Kely, and Lilian Miles. "A Rawlsian basis for core labor rights." Comp. Lab. L. and Pol'y J. 33 (2011): 297. Yoaks AND substantive right to bargain collectively is assured under the second principle of justice. Advantage 2Climate strike participants get arrested now.Scanlan 19 ~Quinn. Quinn Scanlan. Voting, campaigns and elections for @ABC. "Jane Fonda arrested in climate change strike outside Capitol". 10-11-2019. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jane-fonda-arrested-climate-change-strike-capitol/story?id=66209415.~~ AND student climate strikers around the world for taking on this issue so passionately. Strikes incentivize companies to take climate action seriously.Ivanova 19 ~Irin. Work, tech, climate and data for @CBSNews. Priors: @HuffPost, @CrainsNewYork, @newmarkjschool. "These businesses are closing for Friday's climate strike". 9-20-2019. No Publication. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/global-climate-strike-businesses-close-their-doors-in-time-for-climate-strike-2019/.~~ AND Tor, BoingBoing, Greenpeace, Change.org, among many others. ExtinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished,~2~ Reject spec shells – a) infinitely regressive – you can ask me to spec infinite different things which means I will always violate and will never spec enough b) CX checks – I told you in the doc I am willing to spec in CX which means you can still prep how you want and it prevents friv theory which kills topic ed c) pre-round checks – you can contact me before the round for spec which solves all your offenseaff Offense 2~1~ Corporations must respect the diginity of employees; the right to strike is an extension of human dignity.McCrudden 08 Christopher McCrudden, Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights, European Journal of International Law, Volume 19, Issue 4, September 2008, Pages 655–724, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chn043 Dignity has functioned, thirdly, as a source from which new rights may be derived, and existing rights extended. In the Israeli context, for example, human dignity has been seen as providing a basis on which to import rights that had not, intentionally, been included in the text of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. As Kretzmer observes, ‘the Basic Law does not mention many of the fundamental rights that are protected under most constitutions and international human rights instruments …. The most blatant exclusions are equality, freedom of religion and conscience and freedom of speech.’414 These were excluded because of the inability to generate a consensus among the parties in the Knesset that they should be included at that time. Notably, several of the religious parties objected to their inclusion. Given that the self-perceived role of the Israeli Supreme Court is to assist in the building of an Israel that is committed to the broad range of human rights, that was unsatisfying. Conceptualizing human dignity as a general value ‘has enabled the Court to resort to the concept to create rights in various situations’, including in those contexts where the excluded rights would otherwise have been expected to operate.415 In some cases, the Court has used this method to recognize precisely those rights which were deliberately omitted from the Basic Law because of the lack of political consensus.416 For example, in the Hupert case, the Court asserted that the right to equality could be derived from human dignity and as a consequence merited constitutional protection.417 Other rights that have been derived from dignity in a similar manner include freedom of religion, the right to strike, the right of minors not to be subject to corporal punishment, and the right to know the identity of one's parents.418Bowie 98A Kantian Theory of Meaningful, Norman E. Bowie Vol. 17, No. 9/10, How to Make Business Ethics Operational: Creating Effective Alliances: The 10th Annual EBEN Conference (Jul., 1998), pp. 1083-1092 https://www.jstor.org/stable/25073937?origin=JSTOR-pdf**
AND moral agency. Work that deadens autonomy or that undermines rationality is immoral. ~2~ Absent a right to strike, employers use workers as a mere means to an end because they give workers little say in the process of negotiating employment conditions which treats them as passive tools for the use of profit, a right to strike ensures that workers give continual meaningful consent to the employment relationship without threat of coercion | 10/29/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: Blue Key | Round: 4 | Opponent: Lexington EY | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC r2Neg… lets make a trade, you have a choice – you can solve this math equation and read the answer in the 1N and ill conceded permissibility and presumption negates
If you solve this one I’ll concede terminal defense to my advantage 2
Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Ethics must begin apriori –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.Mes~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others. Also, proving an obligation under any index is sufficient to affirm because there isn’t a higher-up framework to weigh theories under which means that you can only disprove a framework from the perspective of another and an obligation under one framework isn’t incompatible with a possibly stronger obligation under another framework.~b~ Degrees of wrongness – only apriori allows for weighing between morality i.e perfect and imperfect duties, positive and negative obligations, while util can’t explain how to weigh between competing infinite obligations like extinction. That justifies the doublebind – either we can weigh and extinction first logic is incoherent or we can’t and util is incoherent.~c~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike.Offense~1~ A right to strike defends workers to set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion.Gourevitch 18: Gourevitch, Alex. "A Radical Defense of the Right to Strike." Jacobin 2018. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/right-to-strike-freedom-civil-liberties-oppression King CP recut AND for the right to strike is to prioritize democratic freedoms over property rights. ~2~ The humanity principle mandates no exploitation of agents.Lofaso 17 Anne Marie Lofaso, Workers’ Rights as Natural Human Rights, 71 U. Miami L. Rev. 565 (2017) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol71/iss3/3 ~Anne Marie Lofaso is Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development and a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law. In 2010, she was named WVU College of Law Professor of the Year.~ King CP recut AND humanity of each person and the effect of our actions on others’ humanity. ~3~ A right to strike is key to support property rights.Chicktay 6 ~Mohamed Alli Chicktay, academic at the University of the Witwatersrand, 2006, "PLACING THE RIGHT TO STRIKE WITHIN A HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK," No Publication, https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/EJC85180~~ King CP AND Interpretations" 1992 47 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 438). ~4~ A right to strike is key to freedom of association and collective bargaining.Vogt 16 ~Jeffrey S Vogt, Legal Director of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), 2016, "The Right to Strike and the International Labour Organisation (ILO)," King’s Law Journal, https://sci-hubtw.hkvisa.net/10.1080/09615768.2016.1148297~~ King CP recut AND which protect freedom of association—and by extension the right to strike. Advantage 1Climate strike participants get arrested now.Scanlan 19 ~Quinn. Quinn Scanlan. Voting, campaigns and elections for @ABC. "Jane Fonda arrested in climate change strike outside Capitol". 10-11-2019. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jane-fonda-arrested-climate-change-strike-capitol/story?id=66209415.~~ AND student climate strikers around the world for taking on this issue so passionately. Strikes incentivize companies to take climate action seriously.Ivanova 19 ~Irin. Work, tech, climate and data for @CBSNews. Priors: @HuffPost, @CrainsNewYork, @newmarkjschool. "These businesses are closing for Friday's climate strike". 9-20-2019. No Publication. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/global-climate-strike-businesses-close-their-doors-in-time-for-climate-strike-2019/.~~ AND Tor, BoingBoing, Greenpeace, Change.org, among many others. ExtinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished,~2~ Reject spec shells – a) infinitely regressive – you can ask me to spec infinite different things which means I will always violate and will never spec enough b) CX checks – I told you in the doc I am willing to spec in CX which means you can still prep how you want and it prevents friv theory which kills topic ed c) pre-round checks – you can contact me before the round for spec which solves all your offenseOffense 2~1~ Corporations must respect the diginity of employees; the right to strike is an extension of human dignity.McCrudden 08 Christopher McCrudden, Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights, European Journal of International Law, Volume 19, Issue 4, September 2008, Pages 655–724, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chn043 Dignity has functioned, thirdly, as a source from which new rights may be derived, and existing rights extended. In the Israeli context, for example, human dignity has been seen as providing a basis on which to import rights that had not, intentionally, been included in the text of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. As Kretzmer observes, ‘the Basic Law does not mention many of the fundamental rights that are protected under most constitutions and international human rights instruments …. The most blatant exclusions are equality, freedom of religion and conscience and freedom of speech.’414 These were excluded because of the inability to generate a consensus among the parties in the Knesset that they should be included at that time. Notably, several of the religious parties objected to their inclusion. Given that the self-perceived role of the Israeli Supreme Court is to assist in the building of an Israel that is committed to the broad range of human rights, that was unsatisfying. Conceptualizing human dignity as a general value ‘has enabled the Court to resort to the concept to create rights in various situations’, including in those contexts where the excluded rights would otherwise have been expected to operate.415 In some cases, the Court has used this method to recognize precisely those rights which were deliberately omitted from the Basic Law because of the lack of political consensus.416 For example, in the Hupert case, the Court asserted that the right to equality could be derived from human dignity and as a consequence merited constitutional protection.417 Other rights that have been derived from dignity in a similar manner include freedom of religion, the right to strike, the right of minors not to be subject to corporal punishment, and the right to know the identity of one's parents.418Bowie 98A Kantian Theory of Meaningful, Norman E. Bowie Vol. 17, No. 9/10, How to Make Business Ethics Operational: Creating Effective Alliances: The 10th Annual EBEN Conference (Jul., 1998), pp. 1083-1092 https://www.jstor.org/stable/25073937?origin=JSTOR-pdf**
AND moral agency. Work that deadens autonomy or that undermines rationality is immoral. ~2~ Absent a right to strike, employers use workers as a mere means to an end because they give workers little say in the process of negotiating employment conditions which treats them as passive tools for the use of profit, a right to strike ensures that workers give continual meaningful consent to the employment relationship without threat of coercionAccessibilityContentionA right to strike defends workers to set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion.Gourevitch 18 AND some of the coercive tactics therefore justified for strikers to strike even when illegal The humanity principle mandates no exploitation of agents.Lofaso 17 A right to strike is key to support property rights.Chicktay 6 A right to strike is key to freedom of association and collective bargaining.Vogt 16 AND bargaining without a right to strike amounts to no more than ‘collective begging’ | 10/30/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: Apple Valley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Byram Hills AK | Judge: Breigh Plat 1AC r2Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Ethics must begin apriori –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.~F~ Evolutionary Development – materiality is constantly changing and evolving – i.e eating a cake could give me lots of pleasure today but pain and disgust tomorrow which proves it can’t guide action.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~c~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression. Also, proving an obligation under any index is sufficient to affirm because there isn’t a higher-up framework to weigh theories under which means that you can only disprove a framework from the perspective of another and an obligation under one framework isn’t incompatible with a possibly stronger obligation under another framework.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike.Offense~1~ A right to strike defends workers to set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion, anything else is a violation of freedom.Gourevitch 18: Gourevitch, Alex. "A Radical Defense of the Right to Strike." Jacobin 2018. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/right-to-strike-freedom-civil-liberties-oppression King CP recut AND for the right to strike is to prioritize democratic freedoms over property rights. ~2~ The humanity principle mandates no exploitation of agents since it’d be a contradiction in conception – if everyone were exploited there’d be no one to exploit.Lofaso 17 Anne Marie Lofaso, Workers’ Rights as Natural Human Rights, 71 U. Miami L. Rev. 565 (2017) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol71/iss3/3 ~Anne Marie Lofaso is Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development and a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law. In 2010, she was named WVU College of Law Professor of the Year.~ King CP recut AND humanity of each person and the effect of our actions on others’ humanity. ~3~ A right to strike is key to support property rightsChicktay 6 ~Mohamed Alli Chicktay, academic at the University of the Witwatersrand, 2006, "PLACING THE RIGHT TO STRIKE WITHIN A HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK," No Publication, https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/EJC85180~~ King CP AND Interpretations" 1992 47 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 438). ~4~ A right to strike is key to freedom of association and collective bargaining.Vogt 16 ~Jeffrey S Vogt, Legal Director of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), 2016, "The Right to Strike and the International Labour Organisation (ILO)," King’s Law Journal, https://sci-hubtw.hkvisa.net/10.1080/09615768.2016.1148297~~ King CP recut AND which protect freedom of association—and by extension the right to strike. Advantage 1Climate strike participants get arrested now.Scanlan 19 ~Quinn. Quinn Scanlan. Voting, campaigns and elections for @ABC. "Jane Fonda arrested in climate change strike outside Capitol". 10-11-2019. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jane-fonda-arrested-climate-change-strike-capitol/story?id=66209415.~~ AND student climate strikers around the world for taking on this issue so passionately. Strikes incentivize companies to take climate action seriously.Ivanova 19 ~Irin. Work, tech, climate and data for @CBSNews. Priors: @HuffPost, @CrainsNewYork, @newmarkjschool. "These businesses are closing for Friday's climate strike". 9-20-2019. No Publication. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/global-climate-strike-businesses-close-their-doors-in-time-for-climate-strike-2019/.~~ AND Tor, BoingBoing, Greenpeace, Change.org, among many others. ExtinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished. No 2nr theory since theres only a 2ar which nictitates judge intervention.~2~ Aff theory first – it’s a much larger strategic loss because 1min is ¼ of the 1AR vs 1/7 of the 1NC which means there’s more abuse if I’m devoting a larger fraction of time. Reject all neg args against the ROB because they assume the ROB is true.Offense 2~1~ Because employees are dependent upon their employer, employees are subject to a severe power imbalance that constitutes coercion.Budd and Scoville 05, John W. Budd and James G. Scoville "The Ethics of Human Resources and Industrial Relations.", p.70, LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ASSOCIATION SERIES, Cornell University Press, October 15, 2005 ~http://jbudd.csom.umn.edu/RESEARCH/hrirethics.htm~~ AHSNPR Accessed 10/23/21 AND to be addressed. Otherwise, industrial relations rests on an unethical foundation. The right to unionize and strike corrects this power imbalance by ensuring an opportunity for organization and collective bargaining.Bowie 99, Norman E., professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota "Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective" Wiley Blackwell. ~https://b-ok.cc/book/2885756/a063b7~~ Accessed 10/24/21 AND none of this requires a revision in my original account of meaningful work. ~2~ Korsgaard affirms – overthinking is bad, vote on the ac only.Wikipedia ~Brackets Original. "Analysis Paralysis". Wikipedia. No Date. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonini27s'paradox~~ AND is making a fatal decision based on hasty judgment or a gut reaction. ~3~ The right to strike prevents managerial interference and ensures respect for workers, rather than allowing them to be used as means for the end of enriching an employerRichman 12, Sheldon Richman, writing on Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) wrote those words in his Principles of Sociology (1896)); May 20, 2012; "Is There a Libertarian Case for Organized Labor?"; ~http://reason.com/archives/2012/05/20/is-there-a-libertarian-case-for-organize~~ AHSNPR Accessed 10/24/21 *brackets in original AND belong to "a passing phase of social evolution." Passing to what? ~4~ Absent a right to strike, employers use workers as a mere means to an end because they give workers little say in the process of negotiating employment conditions which treats them as passive tools for the use of profit, a right to strike ensures that workers give continual meaningful consent to the employment relationship without threat of coercionAccessibilityContentionA right to strike defends workers to set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion.Gourevitch 18 AND some of the coercive tactics therefore justified for strikers to strike even when illegal The humanity principle mandates no exploitation of agents.Lofaso 17 A right to strike is key to support property rights.Chicktay 6 A right to strike is key to freedom of association and collective bargaining.Vogt 16 AND bargaining without a right to strike amounts to no more than ‘collective begging’ | 11/6/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - Korsgaard v4Tournament: Badgerland | Round: 2 | Opponent: Neenah IH | Judge: Lisa Kahler 1AC r2Ethics must begin apriori –Every agent has a practical identity that is the source of value.Korsgaard Christine M. Korsgaard 1992, professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. "The Sources of Normativity", The Tanner Lectures on Human Values AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. ~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.This means any valid practical judgment must be true for every agent. Agents cannot act on a maxim that hinders the outer freedom of others. This justifies universality. Any other norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends, which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on ends-based frameworks.Siyar 1999 Jamsheed Aiam Siyar: Kant’s Conception of Practical Reason. Tufts University, 1999 AND end, its status as to be done, be recognized by others. Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike.Offense~1~ A right to strike defends workers to set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion, anything else is a violation of freedom.Gourevitch 18: Gourevitch, Alex. "A Radical Defense of the Right to Strike." Jacobin 2018. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/right-to-strike-freedom-civil-liberties-oppression King CP recut AND for the right to strike is to prioritize democratic freedoms over property rights. ~2~ The humanity principle mandates no exploitation of agents since it’d be a contradiction in conception – if everyone were exploited there’d be no one to exploit.Lofaso 17 Anne Marie Lofaso, Workers’ Rights as Natural Human Rights, 71 U. Miami L. Rev. 565 (2017) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol71/iss3/3 ~Anne Marie Lofaso is Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development and a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law. In 2010, she was named WVU College of Law Professor of the Year.~ King CP recut AND humanity of each person and the effect of our actions on others’ humanity. ~3~ A right to strike is key to support property rightsChicktay 6 ~Mohamed Alli Chicktay, academic at the University of the Witwatersrand, 2006, "PLACING THE RIGHT TO STRIKE WITHIN A HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK," No Publication, https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/EJC85180~~ King CP AND Interpretations" 1992 47 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 438). ~4~ A right to strike is key to freedom of association and collective bargaining.Vogt 16 ~Jeffrey S Vogt, Legal Director of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), 2016, "The Right to Strike and the International Labour Organisation (ILO)," King’s Law Journal, https://sci-hubtw.hkvisa.net/10.1080/09615768.2016.1148297~~ King CP recut AND which protect freedom of association—and by extension the right to strike. Advantage 1Climate strike participants get arrested now.Scanlan 19 ~Quinn. Quinn Scanlan. Voting, campaigns and elections for @ABC. "Jane Fonda arrested in climate change strike outside Capitol". 10-11-2019. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jane-fonda-arrested-climate-change-strike-capitol/story?id=66209415.~~ AND student climate strikers around the world for taking on this issue so passionately. Strikes incentivize companies to take climate action seriously.Ivanova 19 ~Irin. Work, tech, climate and data for @CBSNews. Priors: @HuffPost, @CrainsNewYork, @newmarkjschool. "These businesses are closing for Friday's climate strike". 9-20-2019. No Publication. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/global-climate-strike-businesses-close-their-doors-in-time-for-climate-strike-2019/.~~ AND Tor, BoingBoing, Greenpeace, Change.org, among many others. Extinction THIS OUTWEIGHS ALL OF THEIR CONSEQUENTALIST OFFENSESpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Advantage 2Global democracy is collapsing now.Freedom House 3/3 ~Freedom House. Freedom House works to defend human rights and promote democratic change, with a focus on political rights and civil liberties. We act as a catalyst for freedom through a combination of analysis, advocacy, and action. Our analysis, focused on 13 central issues, is underpinned by our international program work. "New Report: The global decline in democracy has accelerated". 3-3-2021. . https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-global-decline-democracy-has-accelerated.~~ AND environments investigated government transgressions, and activists persisted in calling out undemocratic practices. The plan solves:First, civic engagement – strikes increase democratic participation which reinvigorates democracy.McElwee 15 ~Sean; Research Associate at Demos; "How Unions Boost Democratic Participation," The American Prospect; 9/16/15; https://prospect.org/labor/unions-boost-democratic-participation/~~ AND a broad swath of the middle class largely unrepresented in the political process." Second, corruption reduction – the right to strike fights concentration of power while reducing inequality.IER 17 ~Institute of Employment Rights. The IER exists to inform the debate around trade union rights and labour law by providing information, critical analysis, and policy ideas through our network of academics, researchers and lawyers. "UN Rights Expert: Right to strike is essential to democracy". 3-10-2017. . https://www.ier.org.uk/news/un-rights-expert-right-strike-essential-democracy/.~~ AND this right, and a negative obligation not to interfere with its exercise." Democratic backsliding causes extinction.Kendall-Taylor 16 ~Andrea; Deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, Senior associate in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington; "How Democracy’s Decline Would Undermine the International Order," CSIS; 7/15/16; https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-democracyE28099s-decline-would-undermine-international-order/~~ AND policy, but it would ensure that we are having the right conversation. | 11/13/21 |
NOVDEC - AC - PetitTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 6 | Opponent: Marlborough TZ | Judge: Noah Gallagher 1AC – Normal1AC – FWAny moral valuation presupposes the unconditional worth of humanity because when agents pursue any end, all value placed upon an object is contingent upon the agent for example a pencil is only valuable to me so long as it can write my paper. Agents have unconditional value because they possess the ability to confer value that stems from their reason. That outweighs.All other frameworks collapse—other theories source obligations in extrinsically good objects, but that presupposes the goodness of the rational will.That justifies universalizable ends – A) a priori principles like reason apply to everyone since they are independent of human experience and B) any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others.There are two models of universal freedom—the non-interference model and the non-domination model. The non-interference holds that someone’s freedom is violated if they are actually interfered with, whereas the non-domination model holds that someone’s freedom is violated if someone has the capacity to arbitrarily interfere. For example, a slave with a benevolent master would be free under non-interference b/c the master let’s them set and pursue whatever ends they want, but unfree under freedom as non-domination b/c their freedom is contingent upon the master who has the capacity to interfere arbitrarily.Prefer the non-domination model:Freedom is good but the non-interference model of freedom allows absolute institutional control—non-domination solves.Pettit 97 Philip Pettit (Laurence Rockefeller University Professor of Politics and Human Values at Princeton University). "Freedom with Honor: A Republican Ideal." Spring 1997. http://www.princeton.edu/~~ppettit/papers/FreedomwithHonor'SocialResearch'1997.pdf AND
====Non-domination is the only notion of freedom that can apply to state actors. Prefer: State interference promotes freedom if it ensures non-domination.==== AND prudently framed, are by no means subversive but rather introductive of liberty." Additionally Prefer:~A~ Ethical frameworks are topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified. Prefer on resource disparities—focusing on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep excluding lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debater under my framework can easily be won without any prep since minimal evidence is required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~B~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. ~C~ Willing to abide by their ethical theory presupposes we have freedom in the first place. Thus, making an argument for another standard concedes the authority to mine.Thus, the standard is consistency with universality as non-domination.~1~ Presumption and Permissibility affirm: a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. b~ If anything is permissible, then so is the aff since there is nothing prohibiting us.~2~ Consequences Fail: a~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict. b~ Induction is circular because it relies on the assumption that nature will hold uniform and we could only reach that conclusion through inductive reasoning based on observation of past events. c~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify because we commit the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral d~ Yes act/omission distinction – there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral~3~ Contesting offense under the Aff framework is a voting issue. Reciprocity – I have to win my framework and beat the NC before I can access case, whereas you can collapse to either layer or dump on offense for 7 minutes as a no-risk issue so there’s a skew. Key to fairness because it’s definitionally equal access to the ballot.1AC – AdvocacyThus, the advocacy – Resolved: A just government ought to recognize the unconditional right of workers to strike.1AC – OffenseRecognizing the right to strike would transform dominating power structures.Lazar 20 ~Orlando; 10/6/20; St. Edmund Hall and Balliol College, University of Oxford; "Work, Domination, and the False Hope of Universal Basic Income," https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11158-020-09487-9~~ Justin AND no longer able to monopolise the residual authority described in the previous section. Striking is a fundamental protection of dignity and the right of the worker to resist a dominant relationship.Mason 18 ~Elinor. Elinor Mason is a senior lecturer in philosophy at Edinburgh University. On striking, and the recognition that ethics are a collective affair. "On striking, and the recognition that ethics are a collective affair". 4-1-2018. openDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/on-striking-and-recognition-that-ethics-are-collective-affair/.~~ SJVM AND it. We hugely appreciate the solidarity of our students: thank you. Non-domination requires restriction of the employer’s power to arbitrarily impose their will on employees.Bogg 17 ~Alan. Alan L Bogg is Professor in Law at the University of Bristol Law School. 'Republican Non-Domination and Labour Law: New Normativity or Trojan Horse?', (2017), 33, International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Issue 3, pp. 391-417, https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/International+Journal+of+Comparative+Labour+Law+and+Industrial+Relations/33.3/IJCL2017017~~ SJVM AND protect illegal migrant-workers and those employed on fixed term contracts.57 | 11/6/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Covid CredibilityTournament: New York City Invitational | Round: 1 | Opponent: Lexington AR | Judge: Fabrice Etienne 1AC r2Advantage 1: Covid AccessOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Advantage 2: CredibilityThe plan is critical to boosting WTO legitimacy.Navnit 21 ~Brajendra; Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India to WTO; "Science has delivered, will the WTO deliver?" Helsinki Times; 1/18/21; https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/columns/columns/viewpoint/18561-science-has-delivered-will-the-wto-deliver.html~~ Justin AND A rating" for Availability only. Our future generations deserve nothing less. WTO cred solves wars that go nuclear.Hamann 09 ~Georgia; 2009; J.D. Candidate, Vanderbilt University Law School; "Replacing Slingshots with Swords: Implications of the Antigua-Gambling 22.6 Panel Report for Developing Countries and the World Trading System," VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW, http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/duqJ53.pdf~~ Justin AND keenly aware of the responsibility they have to uphold the organization’s credibility.108 AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.FramingThe standard is maximizing expected wellbeing.Prefer it:1~ Lexical pre-requisite: threats to bodily security preclude the ability for moral actors to effectively act upon other moral theories since they are in a constant state of crisis that inhibits the ideal moral conditions which other theories presuppose2~ Use epistemic modesty for evaluating the framework debate:A~ Substantively true since it maximizes the probability of achieving net most moral value—beating a framework acts as mitigation to their impacts but the strength of that mitigation is contingent.B~ Clash—disincentives debaters from going all in for framework which means we get the ideal balance between topic ed and phil ed—it’s important to talk about contention-level offense3~ Reject calc indicts and util triggers permissibility arguments:A~ Empirically denied—both individuals and policymakers carry out effective cost-benefit analysis which means even if decisions aren’t always perfect it’s still better than not acting at all—links that could have been explored in more detail. | 10/15/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - KorsgaardTournament: Loyola | Round: 1 | Opponent: Bergen County Academies AK | Judge: Abhinav Sinha 1AC1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. But it’s impossible to derive an ought from descriptive premises, so there needs to be additional a priori premises to make a moral theory.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible~D~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedomThus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Practical identities – we find our lives worth living under practical identities such as student but that presupposes agency.Korsgaard 92 CHRISTINE M. Korsgaard 92 ~I am a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University, where I have taught since 1991. From July 1996 through June 2002, I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. (The current chair is Sean Kelly.) From 2004-2012, I was Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. (The current DGS is Mark Richard.) Before coming here, I held positions at Yale, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of Chicago, as well as visiting positions at Berkeley and UCLA. I served as President of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association in 2008-2009, and held a Mellon Distinguished Achievement Award from 2006-2009. I work on moral philosophy and its history, practical reason, the nature of agency, personal identity, normativity, and the ethical relations between human beings and the other animals~, "The Sources of Normativity", THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES Delivered at Clare Hall, Cambridge University 16-17 Nov 1992, BE AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity, and other frameworks since implies first valuing ourselves to value other normative judgements~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify action because we intend the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral or not. ~D~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~E~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~F~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine ~D~ Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Impact calc: ~A~ There’s an act/omission distinction – otherwise we’d be held infinitely culpable for every omission which kills any conception of morality.AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Intellectual property protection violates the formula of autonomy – multiple warrants.Hale 18 Zachary A., 4-4-2018, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection," Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ JG AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~2~ States shouldn’t be forced to submit to a legal framework outside of their own anarchic conditions – that’s a violation of their own choice which is a contradiction in will.~3~ People can invent things at the same time – under IP one person is blocked from their invention which is a violation of their ability to pursue civil rights like expression, and to share in scientific advancements.~4~ IP treats humans as merely a means to an end driving for personal corporate profit which means its intrinsically a violation of the omnilateral will.~5~ Any human should not have the authority to dictate whether someone should lose their life – it’s a contradiction in conception because scientists and WTO officials willing someone to die is incoherent because life would cease to exist. When they allow for patents to be created, they will for marginalized groups to die via lack of access to medicine.AdvantageIndia is in crisis – the recent COVID surge is fundamentally different from that of the past.Khullar 21. ~(Dhruv Khullar is a contributing writer at The New Yorker, where he writes primarily about medicine, health care, and politics. He is also a practicing physician and an assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical College) "India’s Crisis Marks a New Phase in the Pandemic," The New Yorker, May 13, 2021. https://www.newyorker.com/science/medical dispatch/indias-crisis-marks-a-new-phase-in-the-pandemic~ TDI AND a great system if you think this is the last pandemic we’ll face." That causes Indo-Pak conflict escalation.Somos 20. ~Christy Somos is a CTVNews.ca Writer) "COVID-19 has escalated armed conflict in India, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and the Philippines, study finds," CTV News, December 17, 2020. https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/covid-19-has-escalated-armed-conflict-in-india-pakistan-iraq libya-and-the-philippines-study-finds-1.5236738~ TDI AND leadership crisis, which saw an increase of attacks by Taliban groupsin May. Even a limited Indo-Pak war causes extinction.Menon 19 Prakash Menon, The nuclear cloud hanging over the human race, Nov 15, 2019, ~PhD from Madras University for his thesis "Limited War and Nuclear Deterrence in the Indo-Pak context"~ https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/the-nuclear-cloud-hanging-over-the-human-race/cid/1719608~~# SM AND for its incredibility and the utter stupidity of the use of nuclear weapons. Underview1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. 1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished. No 2NR paradigm issues or RVIs because they have 6 minutes to go for them whereas I only have a 3 minute 2AR to respond so I get crushed on time skew.~2~ RVI on NC theory – you can read arguments such as T that are exclusively neg so I need them to compensate and weighing is structurally unfair since the 7-4-6-3 time skew means that the neg can just dump on weighing and the 2ar becomes impossible. This means that if either side has any offense under any framing then you default aff.~3~ All neg interps are counter interps since the aff takes an implicit stance on every issue which means you need an RVI to become offensive. You should accept all aff interps and assume I meet neg theory since the aff speaks in the dark and I have to take a stance on something, you can at least react and adapt.~4~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. ~5~ Evolution proves our theory trueJohnson and Thayer 16 – Dominic D. P. Johnson, D.Phil., Ph.D.* and Bradley A. Thayer, Ph.D., "The evolution of offensive realism Survival under anarchy from the Pleistocene to the present," https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/56B778004187F70B8E59609BE7FEE7A4/S073093841600006Xa.pdf/div-class-title-the-evolution-of-offensive-realism-div.pdf AND in which human brains and behaviors evolved. But what was that context? | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Harvard Weslake JH | Judge: Sim Guerrero 1AC1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori – independent of materiality:The meta-ethic is procedural moral realism.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 –~1~ Collapses – the only way to verify whether something is a moral fact is by using procedures to warrant it.~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.~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, which necessitates a priori premises.~4~ Transcendental Idealism – what we see is not what is, but our representations of reality – only a priori knowledge is a lane to truth insofar as a lack of the subject removes material constitution and abstracts sensibility as it is then unknown. Every theory of normativity presupposes this to be true because practical reason is a necessary first step to any ethical deliberation.Next is constitutive authority – 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.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Something that is true for me must be true for anyone else i.e. 2+24 must be true for everyone which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. ~B~ Your agency isn’t unique – you can’t make exceptions for yourself. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity, and other frameworks since implies first valuing ourselves to value other normative judgements==== ~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify action because we intend the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral or not. ~D~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~E~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~F~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Intellectual property protection violates the formula of autonomy – multiple warrants.Hale 18 Zachary A., 4-4-2018, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection," Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ JG AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~2~ States shouldn’t be forced to submit to a legal framework outside of their own anarchic conditions – that’s a violation of their own choice which is a contradiction in will.~3~ People can invent things at the same time – under IP one person is blocked from their invention which is a violation of their ability to pursue civil rights like expression, and to share in scientific advancements.~4~ IP treats humans as merely a means to an end driving for personal corporate profit which means its intrinsically a violation of the omnilateral will.~5~ Any human should not have the authority to dictate whether someone should lose their life – it’s a contradiction in conception because scientists and WTO officials willing someone to die is incoherent because life would cease to exist. When they allow for patents to be created, they will for marginalized groups to die via lack of access to medicine.AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don’t assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs AND study strongly supports that ethical position showing that stockpiling will undermine global health." Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Nuclear detonations cause nuclear winter and extinction, and the rainout effect is wrong – self-lofting means soot goes above the cloudsStarr 15 Steven Starr, 10-14-2015, "Nuclear War, Nuclear Winter, and Human Extinction," Federation Of American Scientists, ~Steven Starr is the director of the University of Missouri’s Clinical Laboratory Science Program, as well as a senior scientist at the Physicians for Social Responsibility. He has been published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the Strategic Arms Reduction (STAR) website of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.~, https://fas.org/pir-pubs/nuclear-war-nuclear-winter-and-human-extinction/, SJBE AND engage in an unwinnable academic debate as to whether any humans will survive. | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: Loyola | Round: 5 | Opponent: Taft EL | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. But it’s impossible to derive an ought from descriptive premises, so there needs to be additional a priori premises to make a moral theory.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible~D~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedom.~E~ Darkness Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Practical identities – we find our lives worth living under practical identities such as student but that presupposes agency.Korsgaard 92 CHRISTINE M. Korsgaard 92 ~I am a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University, where I have taught since 1991. From July 1996 through June 2002, I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. (The current chair is Sean Kelly.) From 2004-2012, I was Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. (The current DGS is Mark Richard.) Before coming here, I held positions at Yale, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of Chicago, as well as visiting positions at Berkeley and UCLA. I served as President of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association in 2008-2009, and held a Mellon Distinguished Achievement Award from 2006-2009. I work on moral philosophy and its history, practical reason, the nature of agency, personal identity, normativity, and the ethical relations between human beings and the other animals~, "The Sources of Normativity", THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES Delivered at Clare Hall, Cambridge University 16-17 Nov 1992, BE AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity, and other frameworks since implies first valuing ourselves to value other normative judgements~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify action because we intend the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral or not. ~D~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~E~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~F~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Intellectual property protection violates the formula of autonomy – multiple warrants.Hale 18 Zachary A., 4-4-2018, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection," Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ JG AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~2~ States shouldn’t be forced to submit to a legal framework outside of their own anarchic conditions – that’s a violation of their own choice which is a contradiction in will.~3~ People can invent things at the same time – under IP one person is blocked from their invention which is a violation of their ability to pursue civil rights like expression, and to share in scientific advancements.~4~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND manufacturing capacities, which could also produce COVID-19 vaccines after repurposing. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don’t assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs AND study strongly supports that ethical position showing that stockpiling will undermine global health." Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Nuclear detonations cause nuclear winter and extinction, and the rainout effect is wrong – self-lofting means soot goes above the cloudsStarr 15 Steven Starr, 10-14-2015, "Nuclear War, Nuclear Winter, and Human Extinction," Federation Of American Scientists, ~Steven Starr is the director of the University of Missouri’s Clinical Laboratory Science Program, as well as a senior scientist at the Physicians for Social Responsibility. He has been published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the Strategic Arms Reduction (STAR) website of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.~, https://fas.org/pir-pubs/nuclear-war-nuclear-winter-and-human-extinction/, SJBE AND engage in an unwinnable academic debate as to whether any humans will survive. | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: Loyola | Round: 5 | Opponent: Taft EL | Judge: James Stuckert 1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. But it’s impossible to derive an ought from descriptive premises, so there needs to be additional a priori premises to make a moral theory.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible~D~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedom.~E~ Darkness Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Practical identities – we find our lives worth living under practical identities such as student but that presupposes agency.Korsgaard 92 CHRISTINE M. Korsgaard 92 ~I am a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University, where I have taught since 1991. From July 1996 through June 2002, I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. (The current chair is Sean Kelly.) From 2004-2012, I was Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. (The current DGS is Mark Richard.) Before coming here, I held positions at Yale, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of Chicago, as well as visiting positions at Berkeley and UCLA. I served as President of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association in 2008-2009, and held a Mellon Distinguished Achievement Award from 2006-2009. I work on moral philosophy and its history, practical reason, the nature of agency, personal identity, normativity, and the ethical relations between human beings and the other animals~, "The Sources of Normativity", THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES Delivered at Clare Hall, Cambridge University 16-17 Nov 1992, BE AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity, and other frameworks since implies first valuing ourselves to value other normative judgements~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify action because we intend the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral or not. ~D~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~E~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~F~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Intellectual property protection violates the formula of autonomy – multiple warrants.Hale 18 Zachary A., 4-4-2018, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection," Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ JG AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~2~ States shouldn’t be forced to submit to a legal framework outside of their own anarchic conditions – that’s a violation of their own choice which is a contradiction in will.~3~ People can invent things at the same time – under IP one person is blocked from their invention which is a violation of their ability to pursue civil rights like expression, and to share in scientific advancements.~4~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND manufacturing capacities, which could also produce COVID-19 vaccines after repurposing. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don’t assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs AND study strongly supports that ethical position showing that stockpiling will undermine global health." Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Nuclear detonations cause nuclear winter and extinction, and the rainout effect is wrong – self-lofting means soot goes above the cloudsStarr 15 Steven Starr, 10-14-2015, "Nuclear War, Nuclear Winter, and Human Extinction," Federation Of American Scientists, ~Steven Starr is the director of the University of Missouri’s Clinical Laboratory Science Program, as well as a senior scientist at the Physicians for Social Responsibility. He has been published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the Strategic Arms Reduction (STAR) website of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.~, https://fas.org/pir-pubs/nuclear-war-nuclear-winter-and-human-extinction/, SJBE AND engage in an unwinnable academic debate as to whether any humans will survive. | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v4Tournament: Grapevine | Round: 4 | Opponent: Northland Christian LB | Judge: Chris Castillo 1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. But it’s impossible to derive an ought from descriptive premises, so there needs to be additional a priori premises to make a moral theory.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible~D~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedomThus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~B~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~D~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~E~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AND is incoherent since we can’t presume -P and P are both false. Impact calc: ~A~ There’s an act/omission distinction – otherwise we’d be held infinitely culpable for every omission which kills any conception of morality.AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Intellectual property protection violates the formula of autonomy – multiple warrants.Hale 18 Zachary A., 4-4-2018, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection," Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ JG AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~2~ States shouldn’t be forced to submit to a legal framework outside of their own anarchic conditions – that’s a violation of their own choice which is a contradiction in will.~3~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. ~4~ IPR is nonuniversalizable and interferes with the freedom of people who need medicine.Merges 11 ~(Robert, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati Professor of Law and Technology, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law) "Justifying Intellectual Property," Harvard University Press, 2011~ JL recut Lex VM AND to cut off or restrain the freedom of those who might be treated? AdvantageIndia is in crisis – the recent COVID surge is fundamentally different from that of the past.Khullar 21. ~(Dhruv Khullar is a contributing writer at The New Yorker, where he writes primarily about medicine, health care, and politics. He is also a practicing physician and an assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical College) "India’s Crisis Marks a New Phase in the Pandemic," The New Yorker, May 13, 2021. https://www.newyorker.com/science/medical dispatch/indias-crisis-marks-a-new-phase-in-the-pandemic~ TDI AND a great system if you think this is the last pandemic we’ll face." That causes Indo-Pak conflict escalation.Somos 20. ~Christy Somos is a CTVNews.ca Writer) "COVID-19 has escalated armed conflict in India, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and the Philippines, study finds," CTV News, December 17, 2020. https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/covid-19-has-escalated-armed-conflict-in-india-pakistan-iraq libya-and-the-philippines-study-finds-1.5236738~ TDI AND leadership crisis, which saw an increase of attacks by Taliban groupsin May. Even a limited Indo-Pak war causes extinction.Menon 19 Prakash Menon, The nuclear cloud hanging over the human race, Nov 15, 2019, ~PhD from Madras University for his thesis "Limited War and Nuclear Deterrence in the Indo-Pak context"~ https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/the-nuclear-cloud-hanging-over-the-human-race/cid/1719608~~# SM AND for its incredibility and the utter stupidity of the use of nuclear weapons. The plan bolsters the number of vaccines—-arguments about supply and logistics are empirically disproven.Nancy S. Jecker and Caesar A. Atuire 21. *Department of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, Gauteng, South Africa, "What’s yours is ours: waiving intellectual property protections for COVID-19 vaccines," Journal of Medical Ethics, July 6, 2021, https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/early/2021/07/06/medethics-2021-107555.full.pdf., RJP, DebateDrills. AND will be African—continue to import 99 of its vaccine?’18 Underview1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. 1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished. No 2NR paradigm issues or RVIs because they have 6 minutes to go for them whereas I only have a 3 minute 2AR to respond so I get crushed on time skew.2~ RVI and reasonability on NC theory – you can read arguments such as T that are exclusively neg so I need them to compensate and weighing is structurally unfair since the 7-4-6-3 time skew means that the neg can just dump on weighing and the 2ar becomes impossible. This means that if either side has any offense under any framing then you default aff. | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v5Tournament: Jack Howe | Round: 2 | Opponent: James Logan AD | Judge: Jason Yang I read your paradigm please give me 30 speaks to reify screws agianst me – my favorite thing about your paradigm is that ur tech over truth1AC – FramingEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be. But it’s impossible to derive an ought from descriptive premises, so there needs to be additional a priori premises to make a moral theory.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible~D~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedomThus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Practical identities – we find our lives worth living under practical identities such as student but that presupposes agency.Korsgaard 92 CHRISTINE M. Korsgaard 92 ~I am a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University, where I have taught since 1991. From July 1996 through June 2002, I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. (The current chair is Sean Kelly.) From 2004-2012, I was Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. (The current DGS is Mark Richard.) Before coming here, I held positions at Yale, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of Chicago, as well as visiting positions at Berkeley and UCLA. I served as President of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association in 2008-2009, and held a Mellon Distinguished Achievement Award from 2006-2009. I work on moral philosophy and its history, practical reason, the nature of agency, personal identity, normativity, and the ethical relations between human beings and the other animals~, "The Sources of Normativity", THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES Delivered at Clare Hall, Cambridge University 16-17 Nov 1992, BE AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity, and other frameworks since implies first valuing ourselves to value other normative judgements~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes. ~C~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~D~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~E~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AdvocacyPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics. CPs, Ks, and PICs affirm because they do not disprove my general thesis.Offense~1~ IPR is nonuniversalizable and interferes with the freedom of people who need medicine.Merges 11 ~(Robert, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati Professor of Law and Technology, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law) "Justifying Intellectual Property," Harvard University Press, 2011~ JL recut Lex VM AND to cut off or restrain the freedom of those who might be treated? ~2~ Property rights minimize the opportunity of innovation which limits individual freedom through creating monopolies. They also limit the use of tangible objects such as medicines for good purposes.Cernea and Uszkai 12 Cernea, Mihail-Valentin, and Radu Uszkai. The Clash between Global Justice and Pharmaceutical Patents: A Critical Analysis. 2012, the-clash-between-global-justice-and-drug-patents-a-critical-analysis.pdf. SJEP AND use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules. ~3~ IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 (Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/) BHHS AK AND to the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. ~4~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND prevents generic competition and results in an extension of their market monopoly.Footnote34 Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND COVID-19 case numbers and increase the potential emergence of novel variants, | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v6Tournament: Jack Howe | Round: 3 | Opponent: Christopher Columbus NG | Judge: Matt Contreras ACEthics must begin apriori –~A~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~B~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.~C~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~D~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedomThus, the standard is Consistency with the Categorical Imperative. Prefer:~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.~2~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~3~ Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~D~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~E~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraineAdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. ~2~ An exclusive and unconditional right to property is not entailed by the categorical imperative – only conditional use is universalizable.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND universal laws suffices only to justify the permissibility of that set of rights. ~3~ That implies that intellectual property is unjust.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND thing, regardless of subsequent disuse (cf. §3.10). ~4~ Property rights minimize the opportunity of innovation which limits individual freedom through creating monopolies. They also limit the use of tangible objects such as medicines for good purposes.Cernea and Uszkai 12 Cernea, Mihail-Valentin, and Radu Uszkai. The Clash between Global Justice and Pharmaceutical Patents: A Critical Analysis. 2012, the-clash-between-global-justice-and-drug-patents-a-critical-analysis.pdf. SJEP AND use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules. AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don’t assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs AND that increased vaccine-sharing resulted in reduced case numbers in LARs. " Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. 1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished.~2~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND cannot simply satisfy my desires without considering the rightness or wrongness of my actions | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v7Tournament: Jack Howe | Round: 6 | Opponent: Dougherty Valley TM | Judge: Victoria Yonter 1AC R6 vs DVFramingPresumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Objectivity is true –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Empirical Circularity – in order to see empirical reality we must first be sure our senses don’t deceive us but that’s based in materiality which proves all attempts to prove empiricism are circular.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.~E~ Infinite Arbitrariness – conceptions of reality are subjective, i.e my conception of a tree will be different from yours which proves only objective truth allows for unified understanding.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.~1~ Performativity – Freedom is the key to the justification of arguments. Willing that we should abide by their theory presupposes that we own ourselves in the first place. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Degrees of wrongness – only korsgaard allows for weighing between morality i.e perfect and imperfect duties, util can’t explain how to weigh between competing infinite obligations like extinction. That justifies the double bind – either we can weigh and extinction first logic is incoherent or we can’t and util is incoherent.~3~ Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~D~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~E~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. ~2~ An exclusive and unconditional right to property is not entailed by the categorical imperative – only conditional use is universalizable.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND universal laws suffices only to justify the permissibility of that set of rights. ~3~ That implies that intellectual property is unjust.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND thing, regardless of subsequent disuse (cf. §3.10). ~4~ Property rights minimize the opportunity of innovation which limits individual freedom through creating monopolies. They also limit the use of tangible objects such as medicines for good purposes.Cernea and Uszkai 12 Cernea, Mihail-Valentin, and Radu Uszkai. The Clash between Global Justice and Pharmaceutical Patents: A Critical Analysis. 2012, the-clash-between-global-justice-and-drug-patents-a-critical-analysis.pdf. SJEP AND use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules. AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don’t assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs AND that increased vaccine-sharing resulted in reduced case numbers in LARs. " Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished, | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v8Tournament: Nano Nagle | Round: 2 | Opponent: Marlborough LF | Judge: Ben Cortez 1AC r2Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Ethics must begin apriori –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~C~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others~b~ Degrees of wrongness – only apriori allows for weighing between morality i.e perfect and imperfect duties, positive and negative obligations, while util can’t explain how to weigh between competing infinite obligations like extinction. That justifies the doublebind – either we can weigh and extinction first logic is incoherent or we can’t and util is incoherent.~c~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. ~2~ An exclusive and unconditional right to property is not entailed by the categorical imperative – only conditional use is universalizable.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND universal laws suffices only to justify the permissibility of that set of rights. ~3~ That implies that intellectual property is unjust.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND thing, regardless of subsequent disuse (cf. §3.10). ~4~ Property rights minimize the opportunity of innovation which limits individual freedom through creating monopolies. They also limit the use of tangible objects such as medicines for good purposes.Cernea and Uszkai 12 Cernea, Mihail-Valentin, and Radu Uszkai. The Clash between Global Justice and Pharmaceutical Patents: A Critical Analysis. 2012, the-clash-between-global-justice-and-drug-patents-a-critical-analysis.pdf. SJEP AND use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules. AdvantageThe plan is critical to boosting WTO legitimacy.Navnit 21 ~Brajendra; Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India to WTO; "Science has delivered, will the WTO deliver?" Helsinki Times; 1/18/21; https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/columns/columns/viewpoint/18561-science-has-delivered-will-the-wto-deliver.html~~ Justin AND A rating" for Availability only. Our future generations deserve nothing less. WTO cred solves wars that go nuclear.Hamann 09 ~Georgia; 2009; J.D. Candidate, Vanderbilt University Law School; "Replacing Slingshots with Swords: Implications of the Antigua-Gambling 22.6 Panel Report for Developing Countries and the World Trading System," VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW, http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/duqJ53.pdf~~ Justin AND keenly aware of the responsibility they have to uphold the organization’s credibility.108 Advantage 2Only the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished,~2~ Nonideal theory is epistemically bankrupt:a) triggers skep – we’d constantly be fixing injustices as a precondition to ethical action so we never get to the bottom of what is actually ethical b) relevance - every society has different injustices that occur – the resolution is a universal values statement which means you cannot universalize any theory under nonideal theory c) every ethical theory can be misused – but that isn’t a problem with ethical principles, that is a problem with us – also means we should reclaim the true function of these ethical concepts in places like debate to challenge the way they are misunderstood d) real world injustices need universal ideal principles to ground them and explain why they are wrong. You can’t measure something with a ruler constantly changing length.~c~ Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can’t assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~C~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~D~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~E~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraineOffense 2~1~ Exploitation of patents is anti-ethical to the intrinsic nature of medical duty – that affirms.McHenry 6, Leemon. "Ethical issues in psychopharmacology." Journal of Medical Ethics 32.7 (2006): 405-410. AND their consumers. Despite appearances, nothing of this sort is true in the | 10/9/21 |
SEPTOCT - AC - Korsgaard v9Tournament: Nano Nagle | Round: 4 | Opponent: Marlborough VA | Judge: Joseph Barquin 1AC r2Presumption and permissibility affirm – ~a~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you’d believe me. ~b~ Epistemics – we wouldn’t be able to start a strand of reasoning since we’d have to question that reason. ~c~ Otherwise we’d have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water. ~d~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.Ethics must begin apriori –~A~ Apriori Aposteriori Paradox – big bang proves our theory true – independent of material conditions there was some existence which necessitates objective truth absent material reality.~B~ Action theory – infinite division logically concludes from empiricism. i.e If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention unifies these actions. If we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral.~C~ Constitutive Authority – reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.~D~ Naturalistic fallacy – experience only tells us what is since we can only perceive what is, not what ought to be.~E~ Korsgaards Wager – Korsgaard is or korsgaard is not – inconsistency with perfect duties means infinite badness, that means a 1 chance of apriori ethics being true means you affirm since anything else risks infinite immorality which outweighs any chance of it being wrong.That means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard:~a~ 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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others~b~ Degrees of wrongness – only apriori allows for weighing between morality i.e perfect and imperfect duties, positive and negative obligations, while util can’t explain how to weigh between competing infinite obligations like extinction. That justifies the doublebind – either we can weigh and extinction first logic is incoherent or we can’t and util is incoherent.~c~ Only universalizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. AdvocacyPlan Text – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense~1~ Patents attempt to assert ownership over nature and impede individuals’ abilities to pursue their own ends.Long 95 ~(Roderick T., professor of philosophy at Auburn University, editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, director and president of the Molinari Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society) "The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights," Free Nation Foundation, 1995~ JL recut Lex VM AND the idea on his own, will be forbidden to market his invention. ~2~ An exclusive and unconditional right to property is not entailed by the categorical imperative – only conditional use is universalizable.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND universal laws suffices only to justify the permissibility of that set of rights. ~3~ That implies that intellectual property is unjust.Westphal 97 ~(Kenneth R., Professor of Philosophy at Boðaziçi Üniversitesi, PhD in Philosophy from Wisco) "Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?" Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5 (1997):141–94.~ RE AND thing, regardless of subsequent disuse (cf. §3.10). ~4~ The categorical imperative rejects the idea of intellectual property as it suppresses freedom by preventing others from innovating and suppressing speech in the name of a copyright.Pievatolo 10 Pievatolo, Maria. "Freedom, Ownership and Copyright: Why Does Kant Reject the Concept of Intellectual Property?" Freedom, Ownership and Copyright: Why Does Kant Reject the Concept of Intellectual Property?, 7 Feb. 2010, bfp.sp.unipi.it/chiara/lm/kantpisa1.html. SJEP AND to the Roman Law tradition because of conservatism, but because of Enlightenment. AdvantageThe plan is critical to boosting WTO legitimacy.Navnit 21 ~Brajendra; Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India to WTO; "Science has delivered, will the WTO deliver?" Helsinki Times; 1/18/21; https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/columns/columns/viewpoint/18561-science-has-delivered-will-the-wto-deliver.html~~ Justin AND A rating" for Availability only. Our future generations deserve nothing less. WTO cred solves wars that go nuclear.Hamann 09 ~Georgia; 2009; J.D. Candidate, Vanderbilt University Law School; "Replacing Slingshots with Swords: Implications of the Antigua-Gambling 22.6 Panel Report for Developing Countries and the World Trading System," VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW, http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/duqJ53.pdf~~ Justin AND keenly aware of the responsibility they have to uphold the organization’s credibility.108 Advantage 2Only the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. Underview~1~ Nonideal theory is epistemically bankrupt:a) triggers skep – we’d constantly be fixing injustices as a precondition to ethical action so we never get to the bottom of what is actually ethical b) relevance - every society has different injustices that occur – the resolution is a universal values statement which means you cannot universalize any theory under nonideal theory c) every ethical theory can be misused – but that isn’t a problem with ethical principles, that is a problem with us – also means we should reclaim the true function of these ethical concepts in places like debate to challenge the way they are misunderstood d) real world injustices need universal ideal principles to ground them and explain why they are wrong. You can’t measure something with a ruler constantly changing length.Offense 2~1~ IP interferes with freedom of speech and expression.Moore and Hinma 18 ~Moore, Adam and Ken Himma, "Intellectual Property", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/intellectual-property/.~~/ lm AND troublesome because, unlike patents and copyrights, they do not require disclosure. ~2~ Evergreening – exploitation of patents is anti-ethical to the intrinsic nature of medical duty – that affirms.McHenry 6, Leemon. "Ethical issues in psychopharmacology." Journal of Medical Ethics 32.7 (2006): 405-410. AND public outcry about the moral concerns of the sort raised in this paper. | 10/9/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
11/6/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
11/6/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
11/6/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
11/13/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/29/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/30/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/30/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/9/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/15/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/16/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/16/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
| |
10/30/21 | 23jiad@elmbrookstudentsorg |
|