Tournament: NSD Flagship Camp Tournament | Round: 4 | Opponent: EbeHug JS | Judge: Breigh Plat
My files are not okay right now so here's a link to the doc (open source):
https://1drv.ms/w/s!AnhLvyN1c2-MoyZGnLyvSzcjPl94?e=GSvmSD
----
I deny the truth of the aff which means I’ve met my burden.
Morality must be internally motivating because we must internalize and care about external claims for them to drive action, which means external motivation collapses.
Joyce 01 Joyce, Richard – Professor of Philosophy at Victoria University of Wellington. The Myth of Morality. pp. 109-110. 2001. https://tonysss.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/the-myth-of-morality.pdf.
How could an external reason fulfill the condition quoted above?
AND
action will ensue only if certain desires are present.
Additionally, agents can only be motivated their own desires, a) Opacity: We can’t see into other people’s minds which means their desires and motivation can’t have influence on our motivation. b) People are self interested, if they weren’t nothing bad would ever happen because everyone would just be selfless all the time. c) Desires are infinite and incommunicable.
Contracts solve this because people agree to certain constraints to better promote their self interest. People agree to channel their desires and in doing so, establish a set of moral agreements.
Gauthier 86 Gauthier, David P. Morals by Agreement. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986. Print. (N8)
Moral principles are introduced as the objects of
AND
a moral dimension in their affairs.
Thus, the standard is consistency with contractarian principles of mutual restraint, this is when people agree to constrain their actions for their own self-interest. To clarify, obligations arise from restraints we place on ourselves by entering contracts.
Prefer additionally:
Motivational: We agree to contracts which means they are the most motivational. Anything else is arbitrary and externally imposed, meaning we can just ignore it and not care about it. This outweighs because there’s no point to morality if people can just choose to not follow it.
2. Their framework collapses to mine, because my framework is the process by which we create obligations. Even if they win util we need contracts to channel our pain and pleasure and best promote pleasure.
Merriam-Webster defines unconditional as “not conditional or limited.” This means that the right to strike in all situations must be defended.
“unconditional,” Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unconditional.
Offense
Striking cannot be unconditionally justified under contracts. Workers enter a contract when they agree to work for their employer in exchange for money. Breaking that contract by refusing to work but expecting pay is a violation of contracts. Bad labor practices or negative changes in the workplace don’t turn insofar as the res specifies a right to strike in all situations.
2. A just government would be one that is consistent with contracts so it wouldn’t recognize a right that allows workers to break contracts.
Underview
1 Presumption
2 Permissibility
3 Good Samaritan Paradox
4 No 1AR theory
5 Consequentialism fails