Lake Highland Agrawal Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yale | 3 | Durham BG | Lee, Andrew |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 1 | Lexington VM | Rao, Anand |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 5 | Sysosset LG | Lakshman, Rohit |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Yale | 3 | Opponent: Durham BG | Judge: Lee, Andrew 1ac - Kant |
| Yale | 1 | Opponent: Lexington VM | Judge: Rao, Anand 1ac - data exclusivity |
| Yale | 5 | Opponent: Sysosset LG | Judge: Lakshman, Rohit 1ac - kant |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
SO21 - AC - Data ExclusivityTournament: Yale | Round: 1 | Opponent: Lexington VM | Judge: Rao, Anand | 9/18/21 |
SO21 - AC - KantTournament: Yale | Round: 3 | Opponent: Durham BG | Judge: Lee, Andrew Yale r31acfwThe meta-ethic is practical reason.A~ Bindingness – Any obligation must not only tell us what is good, but why we ought to be good or else agents can reject the value of goodness itself. That means ethics must start with what is constitutive of agents since it traces obligations to features that are intrinsic to being an agent – as an agent you must follow certain rules. Only practical agency is constitutive since agents can use rationality to decide against other values but the act of deciding to reject practical agency engages in it.B~ Action theory – every moral analysis requires an action to evaluate, but actions are infinitely divisible into smaller meaningless movements. The act of stealing can be reduced to going to a house, entering, grabbing things, and leaving, all of which are distinct actions without moral value. Only the practical decision to steal ties these actions together to give them any moral value.That justifies universalizability.A~ The principle of equality is true since anything else assigns moral value to contingent factors like identity and justifies racism, and the principle of non-contradiction is true since 2+2 can't equal 4 for me and not for you meaning ethical statements true for one must be true for all.B~ Is ought gap – experience only tells us what is since that's what we perceive, 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. Applying reason to a priori truth results in universal obligations.This requires a system of property – mere empirical possession is insufficient and contrary to freedom, Hogdson 10:Louis Philippe Hogdson, 2010, "Kant on Property Rights and the State" http://www.yorku.ca/lhodgson/kant-on-property-rights-and.pdf LHP AV However, we are rational and impulsive – this nonideal situation requires a state with coercive authority that secures equal outer freedom and property, Koch 92:*bracketed for gendered language* Koch, Andrew M. "Immanuel Kant, The Right of Necessity, and the Liberal Foundation of Social Welfare" Southeastern Political Review, 20: 2 (Fall 1992) 295-314. https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/koch_andrew_1992_Immanuel_Kant.pdf LHP AV DOA: 9/14/21 Thus, the standard is consistency with a system of equal and outer freedoms. Prefer additionally,1~ An intrinsic feature to any action is the acceptance of the goodness of universal freedom, Gewirth 84 bracketed for grammar and gendered language~Alan Gewirth, () "The Ontological Basis of Natural Law: A Critique and an Alternative" American Journal Of Jurisprudence: Vol. 29: Iss. 1 Article 5, 1984, https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol29/iss1/5/, DOA:9-10-2018 WWBW Recut LHP AV~ 2~ Agency requires deliberation to choose what actions to take which creates a practical identity identical for every agent. It is the only form of ontology that can account for every individual, making it the only identity that can create obligations.Christine M. Korsgaard, 1992 Impacts: A~ Since obligations arise from a universal identity, they must be the same for all, B~ hijacks any role of the judge since judging is an identity contained within the practical oneOffensePlan: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to eliminate patent protections for life-saving medicines. Rizvi 20:Husna Rizvi, "WHAT IF…DRUG PATENTS WERE SCRAPPED?" 24 June 2020, https://newint.org/features/2020/06/11/what-if-drug-patents-were-scrapped LHP AV DOA: 9/17/21 Vote aff –1~ IP rights violate an individual's actual right to property and the grounds on which they are justified while a lack of scarcity makes them unnecessary,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 2~ Right of necessity – nations can legitimately break patents in order to produce life-saving medicines, Bierson 21:Marshall Bierson, ~Marshall is currently completing his PhD in Philosophy at Florida State University. His primarily studies the intersection of ethics and the nature of persons. Outside of Academia, Marshall also directs curricular design for high school debate camps with the Victory Briefs Institute.~ "Intellectual Property and the Right of Necessity" August 18, 2021, https://www.prindlepost.org/2021/08/intellectual-property-and-the-right-of-necessity/ LHP AV DOA:9/14/21 The right of necessity is a logical constraint on the coercive powers of the state – even if not ethical, reducing IP for life saving medicines is not in the jurisdiction of legal punishment – that would undermine the very foundation of the omnilateral will, Koch 92:Koch, Andrew M. "Immanuel Kant, The Right of Necessity, and the Liberal Foundation of Social Welfare" Southeastern Political Review, 20: 2 (Fall 1992) 295-314. https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/koch_andrew_1992_Immanuel_Kant.pdf LHP AV DOA: 9/14/21 UVEvaluate intent not consequences –1~ Actors can only be culpable for their rational decision, not the outcomes. Anything else means actors have no control over the morality of decisions meaning it is impossible for them to be obligated to act.2~ Induction is circular since it is only justified because it worked in the past, which is just induction. That means attempts to predict consequences have no justification, and only the rational decisions behind actions can be evaluated.3~ Consequences are infinite – I could save someone that turns out to be a mass murderer – unpredictability means they are not a stable basis for ethics which freezes action since agents never know what action to takeTheory1~ 1AR Theory Paradigm –Grant me it or else the neg can be infinitely abusiveCompeting interps because reasonability incentivizes defensive dumps to overwhelm the short 2arDrop the debater because the 2ar is too short to win theory and substanceNo RVIs or else 6 minutes in the 2n on theory makes the 2ar impossibleAnd 1AR theory outweighs –A~ I can't win on the neg shell and my shell in the 3-minute 2ar.B~ Epistemic indict – if the 1n was abusive I couldn't respond it, so you can't evaluate their args.2~ Fairness first –A~ testing – if an argument is abusive I can't engage properly so you can't evaluate the truth claimsB~ proximity – the ballot can't alter subjectivity or grant education but voting actually solves fairness impactsC~ the ballot says vote for the better debater not the better cheater which is a metaconstraintMethodAny resistance to systemic injustice must be based on a comprehensive normative theory which determines what the best response to specific injustices are – 4 warrants – Laurence,Laurence, Ben. "The Priority of Ideal Theory." PDF File. LHPYA 1arFollow-on innovation killed, also raises prices. Gurgala 20,Gurgula, Olga. "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies–Should Competition Law Intervene?." IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 51.9 (2020): 1062-1085. LHP YA | 9/18/21 |
SO21 - AC - Kant v2Tournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Sysosset LG | Judge: Lakshman, Rohit Yale r51acfwThe meta-ethic is practical reason.A~ Bindingness – Any obligation must not only tell us what is good, but why we ought to be good or else agents can reject the value of goodness itself. That means ethics must start with what is constitutive of agents since it traces obligations to features that are intrinsic to being an agent – as an agent you must follow certain rules. Only practical agency is constitutive since agents can use rationality to decide against other values but the act of deciding to reject practical agency engages in it.B~ Action theory – every moral analysis requires an action to evaluate, but actions are infinitely divisible into smaller meaningless movements. The act of stealing can be reduced to going to a house, entering, grabbing things, and leaving, all of which are distinct actions without moral value. Only the practical decision to steal ties these actions together to give them any moral value.That justifies universalizability.A~ The principle of equality is true since anything else assigns moral value to contingent factors like identity and justifies racism, and the principle of non-contradiction is true since 2+2 can't equal 4 for me and not for you meaning ethical statements true for one must be true for all.B~ Is ought gap – experience only tells us what is since that's what we perceive, 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. Applying reason to a priori truth results in universal obligations.This requires a system of property – mere empirical possession is insufficient and contrary to freedom, Hogdson 10:Louis Philippe Hogdson, 2010, "Kant on Property Rights and the State" http://www.yorku.ca/lhodgson/kant-on-property-rights-and.pdf LHP AV However, we are rational and impulsive – this nonideal situation requires a state with coercive authority that secures equal outer freedom and property, Koch 92:*bracketed for gendered language* Koch, Andrew M. "Immanuel Kant, The Right of Necessity, and the Liberal Foundation of Social Welfare" Southeastern Political Review, 20: 2 (Fall 1992) 295-314. https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/koch_andrew_1992_Immanuel_Kant.pdf LHP AV DOA: 9/14/21 Thus, the standard is consistency with a system of equal and outer freedoms. Prefer additionally,1~ An intrinsic feature to any action is the acceptance of the goodness of universal freedom, Gewirth 84 bracketed for grammar and gendered language~Alan Gewirth, () "The Ontological Basis of Natural Law: A Critique and an Alternative" American Journal Of Jurisprudence: Vol. 29: Iss. 1 Article 5, 1984, https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol29/iss1/5/, DOA:9-10-2018 WWBW Recut LHP AV~ 2~ Agency requires deliberation to choose what actions to take which creates a practical identity identical for every agent. It is the only form of ontology that can account for every individual, making it the only identity that can create obligations.Christine M. Korsgaard, 1992 Impacts: A~ Since obligations arise from a universal identity, they must be the same for all, B~ hijacks any role of the judge since judging is an identity contained within the practical oneOffensePlan: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to eliminate patent protections for life-saving medicines. Rizvi 20:Husna Rizvi, "WHAT IF…DRUG PATENTS WERE SCRAPPED?" 24 June 2020, https://newint.org/features/2020/06/11/what-if-drug-patents-were-scrapped LHP AV DOA: 9/17/21 Vote aff –1~ IP rights violate an individual's actual right to property and the grounds on which they are justified while a lack of scarcity makes them unnecessary,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 2~ Right of necessity – nations can legitimately break patents in order to produce life-saving medicines, Bierson 21:Marshall Bierson, ~Marshall is currently completing his PhD in Philosophy at Florida State University. His primarily studies the intersection of ethics and the nature of persons. Outside of Academia, Marshall also directs curricular design for high school debate camps with the Victory Briefs Institute.~ "Intellectual Property and the Right of Necessity" August 18, 2021, https://www.prindlepost.org/2021/08/intellectual-property-and-the-right-of-necessity/ LHP AV DOA:9/14/21 The right of necessity is a logical constraint on the coercive powers of the state – even if not ethical, reducing IP for life saving medicines is not in the jurisdiction of legal punishment – that would undermine the very foundation of the omnilateral will, Koch 92:Koch, Andrew M. "Immanuel Kant, The Right of Necessity, and the Liberal Foundation of Social Welfare" Southeastern Political Review, 20: 2 (Fall 1992) 295-314. https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/koch_andrew_1992_Immanuel_Kant.pdf LHP AV DOA: 9/14/21 UVEvaluate intent not consequences –1~ Actors can only be culpable for their rational decision, not the outcomes. Anything else means actors have no control over the morality of decisions meaning it is impossible for them to be obligated to act.2~ Induction is circular since it is only justified because it worked in the past, which is just induction. That means attempts to predict consequences have no justification, and only the rational decisions behind actions can be evaluated.3~ Consequences are infinite – I could save someone that turns out to be a mass murderer – unpredictability means they are not a stable basis for ethics which freezes action since agents never know what action to takeTheory1~ 1AR Theory Paradigm –Grant me it or else the neg can be infinitely abusiveCompeting interps because reasonability incentivizes defensive dumps to overwhelm the short 2arDrop the debater because the 2ar is too short to win theory and substanceNo RVIs or else 6 minutes in the 2n on theory makes the 2ar impossibleAnd 1AR theory outweighs –A~ I can't win on the neg shell and my shell in the 3-minute 2ar.B~ Epistemic indict – if the 1n was abusive I couldn't respond it, so you can't evaluate their args.2~ Fairness first –A~ testing – if an argument is abusive I can't engage properly so you can't evaluate the truth claimsB~ proximity – the ballot can't alter subjectivity or grant education but voting actually solves fairness impactsC~ the ballot says vote for the better debater not the better cheater which is a metaconstraint3~ Aff RVIs –A~ The 2ar is too short to win theory and substanceB~ Reciprocity – The neg has access to T and theory, so we need an RVI and theory to compensate for your unique avenue to the ballot4~ Affirming is harderA~ 4 minute 1ar needs to answer 7 and hedge against 6 minute collapseB~ neg is reactionary and thus gets to tailorC~ empirics – there's a rigorous methodology and large sample size – Shah 2-13:Sachin Shah, ~LHP Debater, Attended TOC 2018 and TOC 2019, Broke at TOC 2019, 5 on AP Stats, Computer Science Major, Experience with side bias stats~ February 13, 2020, "A Statistical Analysis of Side-Bias on the 2020 January-February Lincoln Douglas Debate Topic by Sachin Shah" http://nsdupdate.com/2020/a-statistical-analysis-of-side-bias-on-the-2020-january-february-lincoln-douglas-debate-topic-by-sachin-shah/?fbclid=IwAR2P0AZqQtSiwMZlCpia-Fy1zFOdHn6JrGtcYgGulqeimd-V0a1xbaIMYYs LHP AV That means presumption and permissibility affirm – If we are tied on the flow I did the better debating to overcome the skew – it's the only implication.5~ presumption and permissibility substantively affirmA~ a reduction is not a positive action but protection is, no obligation means we can't enforce protections so we have to reduce themB~ we wouldn't be able to take any actions like drinking water or going to sleep if it negated | 9/18/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
9/18/21 | yagrawal2023@gmailcom |
| |
9/18/21 | yagrawal2023@gmailcom |
| |
9/18/21 | yagrawal2023@gmailcom |
|