Tournament: nano nagle classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harker AR | Judge: Perez, Christopher
Gewirth 84: Alan Gewirth (UChi Prof) "THE ONTOLOGICAL BASIS OF NATURAL LAW: A CRITIQUE AND AN ALTERNATIVE." 29 American Journal of Jurisprudence. 95. 1984. HeinOnline.
Let me briefly sketch the main line of argument that leads to this conclusion.
AND
of consistency with the material consideration of the generic features and rights of action
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 so to my claim about the constitutional consistency of freedom as noninterference with institutional
AND
- they may happen to receive respect but they will not command respect.
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
The decent society, as Avishai Margalit (1996) defines it for us,
AND
to politics that was sidelined by classical liberalism in the early nineteenth century.
Waltman 2: Jerry Waltman (taught political science at the University of Southern Mississippi for 25 years; in 15 of those he participated in the British Studies Program. He currently holds an endowed professorship in political science at Baylor University, where he teaches British politics and comparative public law. He received his Ph.D. from Indiana University, and is the author of eight books and numerous articles in academic journals on both British and American politics. In addition to his years spent on the British Studies Program, he has traveled and taught in the UK on many occasions). "Civic Republicanism, The Basic Income Guarantee, and the Living Wage." USBIG Discussion Paper. No. 25, March 2002.
Civic republicanism's origins lie in the ancient world, in the political theory undergirding several
AND
"life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." (9)
Thus, the standard is non-domination, defined as minimizing the capacity for arbitrary interference. 3 more reasons.
First, non-domination is the primary moral good and turns other frameworks; it's a pre-req to other values.
Pettit 99: Pettit, Philip (Professor at Princeton). Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government. Oxford University Press, USA (September 30, 1999).
The first of the further benefits becomes visible when we reflect on a salient way
AND
uncertainty, non-domination has the firm attraction of a primary good.
Pettit 99: Pettit, Philip (Professor at Princeton). Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government. Oxford University Press, USA (September 30, 1999).
Republicanism is a consequentialist doctrine which assigns to government, in particular to governmental authorities
AND
are tied: that they are agents with little or no independent discretion.
Ripstein 9
Arthur Ripstein. Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy. Harvard University Press. 2009.
The right to freedom as independence provides a model of interaction that reconciles the ability
AND
the patent system and reverse the drug industry's dramatic expansion of patent monopolies.
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
To make this point clearer, we regard property as an ethical institution which emerged
AND
use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules.
1~ Allow 1AR theory because it checks against infinite abuse in the neg. 1AR theory is drop the debater, no RVI, and competing interps – the 4-minute 1ar does not have time to win both theory and substance so you must be punished. It's also key to deterring abusive NC's from spreading out the 1AR on paradigm issues or the 2NR from overwhelming the 2A on the line by line. Fairness is a voter because debaters must be on an equitable level before engaging in substantive education.
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 definitively so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.
a) Extinction based politics is a form of domination, it allows states to always intervene in people's rights through an arbitrary justification of solving for random extinction impacts, which my syllogism specifically rejects.
b) Everything technically could cause extinction – spraying hairspray could put a hole in the ozone layer - it's infinitely regressive
c) Probability comes before Magnitude, otherwise we would constantly focus on non-applicable things
My framework means extinction impacts don't matter. All they do is serve to pull us away from thinking about the right and moral responses to the world around us. Additionally, even if greed is the only way to stop extinction it would still be wrong..
C.S. Lewis 86. Present Concerns: A Compelling Collection of Timely, Journalistic Essays. "On Living in an Atomic Age." Compiled in 1986.
In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb.
AND
served Earth best. Those who love Man less than God do most for