| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any | 1 | any | any |
|
|
| |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 1 | Presentation NR | Dylan Jones |
|
|
| |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 4 | Newman smith sj | Holden Bukowsky |
|
|
| |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 5 | Harison MB | Allison Aldrige |
|
|
| |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Octas | Garland LY | panel |
|
|
| |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 1 | Harker AA | Matt Moorhead |
|
|
| |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 3 | Austin Broussard | Lexington BF |
|
|
| |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 5 | DTHS HV | Ishan Rereddy |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 2 | Lexington AT | Aryan Jasani |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 3 | Northern Valley JS | Keshav Dandu |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 6 | Perry JA | Grant Brown |
|
|
| |
| THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | 1 | Cypress Woods AT | Nelson Okunlola |
|
|
| |
| THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | 4 | Mcneil KJ | Patrick Fox |
|
|
| |
| The Longhorn Classic | 1 | Saint Marys Hall Jolie Mao | ALEXANDER YOAKUM |
|
|
| |
| The Longhorn Classic | 4 | Boerne TT | Aaron Barcio |
|
|
| |
| The Longhorn Classic | 6 | Westwood AR | Brett Cryan |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Any | 1 | Opponent: any | Judge: any contact info |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 1 | Opponent: Presentation NR | Judge: Dylan Jones 1ac - pandemics |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 4 | Opponent: Newman smith sj | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1ac - korsgaard |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | 5 | Opponent: Harison MB | Judge: Allison Aldrige 1ac - korsgaard |
| GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Octas | Opponent: Garland LY | Judge: panel 1ac - korsgaard |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 1 | Opponent: Harker AA | Judge: Matt Moorhead 1ac - korsgaard |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 3 | Opponent: Austin Broussard | Judge: Lexington BF 1ac - korsgaard (thirty speaks spike at the top) |
| GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | 5 | Opponent: DTHS HV | Judge: Ishan Rereddy 1ac - korsgaard |
| Mid America Cup | 2 | Opponent: Lexington AT | Judge: Aryan Jasani 1ac - korsgaard (v4) |
| Mid America Cup | 3 | Opponent: Northern Valley JS | Judge: Keshav Dandu 1ac - korsgaard (v4) |
| Mid America Cup | 6 | Opponent: Perry JA | Judge: Grant Brown 1ac - korsgaard |
| THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | 1 | Opponent: Cypress Woods AT | Judge: Nelson Okunlola 1ac - korsgaard |
| THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | 4 | Opponent: Mcneil KJ | Judge: Patrick Fox 1ac - Korsgaard disclosure |
| The Longhorn Classic | 1 | Opponent: Saint Marys Hall Jolie Mao | Judge: ALEXANDER YOAKUM 1ac - pettit |
| The Longhorn Classic | 4 | Opponent: Boerne TT | Judge: Aaron Barcio 1ac - pettit |
| The Longhorn Classic | 6 | Opponent: Westwood AR | Judge: Brett Cryan 1ac - pettit |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Contact InfoTournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: any | Judge: any | 9/10/21 |
JF - AC - KorsgaardTournament: THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | Round: 1 | Opponent: Cypress Woods AT | Judge: Nelson Okunlola FrameworkEthics must begin a priori~A~ Empirical Uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us 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~ Constitutive Authority – The meta-ethic is bindingness. Practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask why I should be a reasoner concedes it’s authority since you’re actively reasoning.~C~ 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.That justifies universality – 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.Additionally:~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~ 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. Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.~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.AdvocacyThus, the plan – Resolved: The appropriation of outer space by private entities is unjust. Definitions and enforcement in the doc and I’ll clarify in cross.To clarify we’ll defend implementation and a revision to the Outer Space Treaty that explicitly bans appropriation of outer space by private entities AND because oxygen molecules are not in enough abundance to make the sky blue. Offense~1~ Privatization is bad~a~ The OST prevents state-based sovereignty claims in space. But it does not clearly restrict corporations and even if it does it may imminently be changed. This means that regions could be under the exclusive control of corporations, while no government has authority.Ward 19 Peter Ward (Peter Ward studied journalism at the University of Sheffield before moving to Dubai, where he reported on the energy sector. After three years in the Middle East, he earned his master’s degree in business journalism from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. His work has appeared in GQ, Bloomberg Buisnessweek, The Economist, and Newsweek. He lives in New York City.) "The unintended consequences of privatising space," ScienceFocus (Online version of BBC Science Focus Magazine). Nov. 6th, 2019. https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/the-unintended-consequences-of-privatising-space/ SJMS AND the necessary small steps now to avoid potentially disastrous consequences in the future. ~b~ That’s an instance of a unilateral will governing individuals while universal decision making is absent. This is an unjust state which violates people’s freedoms and violates the categorical imperative.Cordelli 16 Chiara Cordelli ~Chiara Cordelli is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. Her main areas of research are social and political philosophy, with a particular focus on theories of distributive justice, political legitimacy, normative defenses of the state, and the public/private distinction in liberal theory. She is the author of The Privatized State (Princeton University Press, 2020), which was awarded the 2021 ECPR political theory prize for best first book in political theory. She is also the co-editor of, and a contributor to, Philanthropy in Democratic Societies (University of Chicago Press, 2016). — cordelli@uchicago.edu~ "WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRIVATIZATION?", University of Chicago, Political Science and the College, https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/What-is-Wrong-With-Privatization'UCB.pdf AND as the implementation of public, justice-based responsibilities through private agents. UV~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory since the neg can be infinitely abusive and I can’t check back. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer since the 1ar is too short to win both theory and substance and reasonability bites intervention since it’s up to the judge to determine. No 2NR RVI, paradigm issues, theory, evidence, or new responses to AC arguments since they’d dump on it for 6 minutes and my 3-minute 2AR is spread too thin. No RVIs on AC arguments – incentivizes a 7 minute collapse that decks 1AR strategy.====~2~ Fairness is a voter: A~ Debate’s a competitive game and requires objective evaluation. B~ Fairness best coheres a winner since if one debater had ten minutes to speak and the other had three there would be incongruence that alters ability to judge the better debater C~ Determines engagement in substance so it outweighs.==== ====~3~ Weigh the case vs the K: a~ Fairness – opposing frameworks moot our offense – there are infinite parts they could problematize which forces a 1ar restart b~ Clash – Our scholarship is tied to the goodness of our framework and plan c~ Role playing is key to better tackle problems of oppression and create tangible solutions.==== AND should be. And then we must be committed to making it so. AdvantageThe advantage is Debris:Privatization of space is unsustainable and increases debris – triggers the Kessler SyndromeThompson 21 ~Clive, 11/17/21, Clive Thompson is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine, a columnist for Wired and Smithsonian magazines, and a regular contributor to Mother Jones. He’s the author of Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World, and Smarter Than You Think: How Technology is Changing our Minds for the Better. He’s @pomeranian99 on Twitter and Instagram, "Get Ready for the "Kessler Syndrome" to Wreck Outer Space," OneZero, https://onezero.medium.com/get-ready-for-the-kessler-syndrome-to-wreck-outer-space-7f29cfe62c3e~~ Justin AND orbit but unintentional ones — bits of rocket parts and detritus from launches. Privatization exponentially increases the curve but ending dangerous missions prevents it.Bernat 20 ~Pawel, 2020, Military University of Aviation, "ORBITAL SATELLITE CONSTELLATIONS AND THE GROWING THREAT OF KESSLER SYNDROME IN THE LOWER EARTH ORBIT," SAFETY ENGINEERING OF ANTHROPOGENIC OBJECTS, Volume 4, PDF~ Justin AND the global level, apart from first-come, first-served. Debris causes nuclear war—-Noko, Iran, and China.Beauchamp 14 – Zack, 4/21/14, Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers global politics and ideology, and a host of Worldly, Vox's podcast on foreign policy and international relations. His work focuses on the rise of the populist right across the West, the role of identity in American politics, and how fringe ideologies shape the mainstream. Before coming to Vox, he edited TP Ideas, a section of Think Progress devoted to the ideas shaping our political world. He has an MSc from the London School of Economics in International Relations and grew up in Washington, DC, where he currently lives with his wife, daughter, and two (rescue) dogs ~"How space trash could start a nuclear war," Vox, https://www.vox.com/2014/4/21/5625246/space-war-china-north-korea-iran~~ Justin AND war is imminent — an assessment that could have self-fulfilling consequences." | 1/8/22 |
JF - AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: THE 47TH CHURCHILL CLASSIC TOC AND NIETOC QUALIFIER | Round: 4 | Opponent: Mcneil KJ | Judge: Patrick Fox FrameworkEthics must begin a priori~A~ Empirical Uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us 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~ Constitutive Authority – The meta-ethic is bindingness. Practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask why I should be a reasoner concedes it’s authority since you’re actively reasoning.~C~ 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.That justifies universality – 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.Additionally:~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~ 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. Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.~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.AdvocacyThus, the plan – Resolved: The appropriation of outer space by private entities is unjust. Definitions and enforcement in the doc and I’ll clarify in cross.To clarify we’ll defend implementation and a revision to the Outer Space Treaty that explicitly bans appropriation of outer space by private entities AND because oxygen molecules are not in enough abundance to make the sky blue. Offense~1~ Privatization is bad~a~ The OST prevents state-based sovereignty claims in space. But it does not clearly restrict corporations and even if it does it may imminently be changed. This means that regions could be under the exclusive control of corporations, while no government has authority.Ward 19 Peter Ward (Peter Ward studied journalism at the University of Sheffield before moving to Dubai, where he reported on the energy sector. After three years in the Middle East, he earned his master’s degree in business journalism from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. His work has appeared in GQ, Bloomberg Buisnessweek, The Economist, and Newsweek. He lives in New York City.) "The unintended consequences of privatising space," ScienceFocus (Online version of BBC Science Focus Magazine). Nov. 6th, 2019. https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/the-unintended-consequences-of-privatising-space/ SJMS AND the necessary small steps now to avoid potentially disastrous consequences in the future. ~b~ That’s an instance of a unilateral will governing individuals while universal decision making is absent. This is an unjust state which violates people’s freedoms and violates the categorical imperative.Cordelli 16 Chiara Cordelli ~Chiara Cordelli is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. Her main areas of research are social and political philosophy, with a particular focus on theories of distributive justice, political legitimacy, normative defenses of the state, and the public/private distinction in liberal theory. She is the author of The Privatized State (Princeton University Press, 2020), which was awarded the 2021 ECPR political theory prize for best first book in political theory. She is also the co-editor of, and a contributor to, Philanthropy in Democratic Societies (University of Chicago Press, 2016). — cordelli@uchicago.edu~ "WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRIVATIZATION?", University of Chicago, Political Science and the College, https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/What-is-Wrong-With-Privatization'UCB.pdf AND as the implementation of public, justice-based responsibilities through private agents. UV~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory since the neg can be infinitely abusive and I can’t check back. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer since the 1ar is too short to win both theory and substance and reasonability bites intervention since it’s up to the judge to determine. No 2NR RVI, paradigm issues, theory, evidence, or new responses to AC arguments since they’d dump on it for 6 minutes and my 3-minute 2AR is spread too thin. No RVIs on AC arguments – incentivizes a 7 minute collapse that decks 1AR strategy.~2~ Interpretation: Debaters may not lie about disclosure practicesViolation: I have screenshtosIntegrity: Lying about what you do is an academic integrity violation since you have claimed to do something that you haven’t. You should be epistemically suspect about anything else since they could be lying about everything, which precludes evaluating any of their arguments. I don’t need to win that discclosure is good since my shell is about you lying.Drop the debater AdvantageThe advantage is Debris:Privatization of space is unsustainable and increases debris – triggers the Kessler SyndromeThompson 21 ~Clive, 11/17/21, Clive Thompson is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine, a columnist for Wired and Smithsonian magazines, and a regular contributor to Mother Jones. He’s the author of Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World, and Smarter Than You Think: How Technology is Changing our Minds for the Better. He’s @pomeranian99 on Twitter and Instagram, "Get Ready for the "Kessler Syndrome" to Wreck Outer Space," OneZero, https://onezero.medium.com/get-ready-for-the-kessler-syndrome-to-wreck-outer-space-7f29cfe62c3e~~ Justin AND orbit but unintentional ones — bits of rocket parts and detritus from launches. Privatization exponentially increases the curve but ending dangerous missions prevents it.Bernat 20 ~Pawel, 2020, Military University of Aviation, "ORBITAL SATELLITE CONSTELLATIONS AND THE GROWING THREAT OF KESSLER SYNDROME IN THE LOWER EARTH ORBIT," SAFETY ENGINEERING OF ANTHROPOGENIC OBJECTS, Volume 4, PDF~ Justin AND the global level, apart from first-come, first-served. Debris causes nuclear war—-Noko, Iran, and China.Beauchamp 14 – Zack, 4/21/14, Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers global politics and ideology, and a host of Worldly, Vox's podcast on foreign policy and international relations. His work focuses on the rise of the populist right across the West, the role of identity in American politics, and how fringe ideologies shape the mainstream. Before coming to Vox, he edited TP Ideas, a section of Think Progress devoted to the ideas shaping our political world. He has an MSc from the London School of Economics in International Relations and grew up in Washington, DC, where he currently lives with his wife, daughter, and two (rescue) dogs ~"How space trash could start a nuclear war," Vox, https://www.vox.com/2014/4/21/5625246/space-war-china-north-korea-iran~~ Justin AND war is imminent — an assessment that could have self-fulfilling consequences." | 1/8/22 |
ND - AC - PettitTournament: The Longhorn Classic | Round: 1 | Opponent: Saint Marys Hall Jolie Mao | Judge: ALEXANDER YOAKUM 1AC – 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~ 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. ~B~ 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 moral1AC – 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 UVInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative frameworkViolation: It’s preemptivePrefer-1~ Time skew- Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can’t get back time lost and it’s the only way to measure abuse.2~ Topic Ed- Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs- A~ Time Frame- We only have 2 months to debate the topic B~ Inclusion- Phil and K literature is incredibly dense and requires a vast amount of prior knowledge and experience which excludes novices while topic literature is less esoteric3~ Prep skew- We can’t predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible. Especially true since there are millions of K’s and NC’s that could negate. Prep skew outweighs A~ Sequencing- It’s a perquisite engaging in-round since you need prep to debate B~ Engagement- It ruins the quality and depth of discussions that make debate rounds educational.Fairness is a voter- intrinsic to the debate; education- terminal impact to debate; DTD and CI- deter futue abuse, and sets the best norms and rzn is arbtrary and invites judge intervention; no rvi- means 7 minute dump on something they chose 1~ 1AR theory is legit – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – 1AR are too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.CourtsThe right to strike is Customary International Law, but the US fails to meet opinio juris standards. Perception of US insufficiency breeds uncertainty with confidence in international law and spirals into noncompliance – that causes a legitimacy crisis. No alt causes to legitimacy – FOA is central to the ILO and the biggest internal link.Brudney 21 ~James; 2/8/21; Joseph Crowley Chair in Labor and Employment Law, Fordham Law School; "The Right to Strike as Customary International Law," THE YALE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, Vol 46, https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1710andcontext=yjil~~ Justin Brackets in original AND accept international standards and practices; and contemporary U.N. leadership. That prevents harmonization of norms and throws the functioning of international institutions into question – prefer empirics.Seifert 21 ~Achim; 2021; Full Professor of Private Law, German and European Labor Law and Comparative Law at the University of Jena (since 2011). He holds both German State Exams in Law and a PhD of the Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-University of Frankfurt (1998). After his Habilitation ~Post-Doc~ in 2006 at the University of Frankfurt and several short-term Replacements at the Universities of Frankfurt and Trier (2006-2008), he became an Associate Professor of European and International Labor Law at the University of Luxembourg (2008). His main fields of interest are the Labor Law of the European Union and Comparative Labor Law, including the methodology of Comparative Law. Achim SEIFERT serves as co-editor of the Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal (CLLPJ) and is a member of the editorial board of the European Labour Law Journal (ELLJ) as well as of the Revue de droit comparé du travail et de la sécurité sociale (RDCTSS). He is an associated member of the International Academy of Comparative Law (since 2013) and fellow of the European Law Institute (ELI) (since 2014); furthermore he has been member of the Jean-Monnet-Centre of Excellence at the University of Jena (2013-2016). He has been visiting Professor at the Universities of Bordeaux, Nantes, Paris 1 (Panthéon-Sorbonne), Luigi Bocconi/Milan and Leuven (Global Law Programme) and has taught as adjunct professor at the University of Luxembourg between 2011 and 2016; "Book Review," European Labour Law Journal, https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1177/2031952521994412~~ Justin AND of the constituents therefore necessarily brings into question the functioning of the ILO. Scenario one is SDG:Harmonizing international labor standards are key to Sustainable Development Goals – compliance is key.ILO 15 ~International Labor Organization; The International Labour Organization is a United Nations agency whose mandate is to advance social and economic justice through setting international labour standards. Founded in October 1919 under the League of Nations, it is the first and oldest specialised agency of the UN; "The benefits of International Labour Standards," No date stated but most recent event cited is 2015, https://www.ilo.org/global/standards/introduction-to-international-labour-standards/the-benefits-of-international-labour-standards/lang—en/index.htm~ Justin AND , it is in everyone’s interest to see these rules applied across the board That’s key to head off a laundry list of interacting catastrophic risks, the combination of which causes extinction and amplifies every other threat.Tom Cernev and Richard Fenner 20, Australian National University; Centre for Sustainable Development, Cambridge University Engineering Department, "The importance of achieving foundational Sustainable Development Goals in reducing global risk," Futures, Vol. 115, January 2020, Elsevier. Recut Justin AND climate change provides the backdrop against which all these interactions will play out. | 12/4/21 |
ND - AC - Pettit v2Tournament: The Longhorn Classic | Round: 6 | Opponent: Westwood AR | Judge: Brett Cryan CourtsThe right to strike is Customary International Law, but the US fails to meet opinio juris standards. Perception of US insufficiency breeds uncertainty with confidence in international law and spirals into noncompliance – that causes a legitimacy crisis. No alt causes to legitimacy – FOA is central to the ILO and the biggest internal link.Brudney 21 ~James; 2/8/21; Joseph Crowley Chair in Labor and Employment Law, Fordham Law School; "The Right to Strike as Customary International Law," THE YALE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, Vol 46, https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1710andcontext=yjil~~ Justin Brackets in original AND accept international standards and practices; and contemporary U.N. leadership. That prevents harmonization of norms and throws the functioning of international institutions into question – prefer empirics.Seifert 21 ~Achim; 2021; Full Professor of Private Law, German and European Labor Law and Comparative Law at the University of Jena (since 2011). He holds both German State Exams in Law and a PhD of the Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-University of Frankfurt (1998). After his Habilitation ~Post-Doc~ in 2006 at the University of Frankfurt and several short-term Replacements at the Universities of Frankfurt and Trier (2006-2008), he became an Associate Professor of European and International Labor Law at the University of Luxembourg (2008). His main fields of interest are the Labor Law of the European Union and Comparative Labor Law, including the methodology of Comparative Law. Achim SEIFERT serves as co-editor of the Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal (CLLPJ) and is a member of the editorial board of the European Labour Law Journal (ELLJ) as well as of the Revue de droit comparé du travail et de la sécurité sociale (RDCTSS). He is an associated member of the International Academy of Comparative Law (since 2013) and fellow of the European Law Institute (ELI) (since 2014); furthermore he has been member of the Jean-Monnet-Centre of Excellence at the University of Jena (2013-2016). He has been visiting Professor at the Universities of Bordeaux, Nantes, Paris 1 (Panthéon-Sorbonne), Luigi Bocconi/Milan and Leuven (Global Law Programme) and has taught as adjunct professor at the University of Luxembourg between 2011 and 2016; "Book Review," European Labour Law Journal, https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1177/2031952521994412~~ Justin AND of the constituents therefore necessarily brings into question the functioning of the ILO. Scenario one is SDG:Harmonizing international labor standards are key to Sustainable Development Goals – compliance is key.ILO 15 ~International Labor Organization; The International Labour Organization is a United Nations agency whose mandate is to advance social and economic justice through setting international labour standards. Founded in October 1919 under the League of Nations, it is the first and oldest specialised agency of the UN; "The benefits of International Labour Standards," No date stated but most recent event cited is 2015, https://www.ilo.org/global/standards/introduction-to-international-labour-standards/the-benefits-of-international-labour-standards/lang—en/index.htm~ Justin AND , it is in everyone’s interest to see these rules applied across the board That’s key to head off a laundry list of interacting catastrophic risks, the combination of which causes extinction and amplifies every other threat.Tom Cernev and Richard Fenner 20, Australian National University; Centre for Sustainable Development, Cambridge University Engineering Department, "The importance of achieving foundational Sustainable Development Goals in reducing global risk," Futures, Vol. 115, January 2020, Elsevier. Recut Justin AND climate change provides the backdrop against which all these interactions will play out. 1AC – 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
Additionally Prefer:~a~ 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 moral1AC – 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. 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 UVInterpretation: The negative may not read an alternative ethical theory – to clarify, they may not read a different ethical framework ie util/prag/virtue ethics etc.Violation: It’s preemptivePrefer-1~ Time skew- Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can’t get back time lost and it’s the only way to measure abuse.2~ Topic Ed- Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs- A~ Time Frame- We only have 2 months to debate the topic B~ Inclusion- Phil and K literature is incredibly dense and requires a vast amount of prior knowledge and experience which excludes novices while topic literature is less esotericFairness is a voter- intrinsic to the debate; education- terminal impact to debate; DTD and CI- deter futue abuse, and sets the best norms and rzn is arbtrary and invites judge intervention; no rvi- means 7 minute dump on something they chose 1~ 1AR theory is legit – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – 1AR are too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time. | 12/4/21 |
SO - AC - KorsgaardTournament: GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Round: 4 | Opponent: Newman smith sj | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1ACFramingEthics 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~ 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:~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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Consequences Fail: ~A~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict or calculate. ~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~ Aggregation fails – suffering is not additive can’t compare between one migraine and 10 head aches~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~ 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.AdvocacyResolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Enforcement is to eliminate all IPR for medicinesBaker 16 Brook Baker (Professor of Law, Northeastern University. He is a senior policy analyst for Health GAP (Global Access Project) and is actively engaged in campaigns for universal access to treatment, prevention, and care for people living with HIV/AIDS, especially expanded and improved medical treatment. He has written and consulted extensively on intellectual property rights, trade, access to medicines and medicines regulatory policy, including with the African Union, NEPAD, Uganda, ASEAN, Thailand, Indonesia, Venezuela, CARICOM, UK DfID, the World Health Organization, the Millennium Development Goals Project, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Open Society Institute, UNDP, UNITAID, the Medicines Patent Pool, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, and others). and Health GAP, Contribution to the United Nations Secretary-General's High-Level Panel on Access to Medicines, February 26, 2016, http://www.unsgaccessmeds.org/inbox/2016/2/26/z73kpodxk4jw96mhqe2tivq0sdl g3v/ AND and attributional interests of inventors and creators can be met through other means. Offense1~ 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. UV~1~ 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.2~ 1AR theory is legit otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there would be no way to check back against that.Comes first because it indicts the neg’s positions and skews my time allocation on other flows like T.Competing interps – rzn is artbitrary and invites judge intervention and race to the top1AR theory is drop the debater – a 4 minute 1AR doesn’t have time to win both theory and substance – you must be punished.No RVI on 1AR theory-It would be impossible to check back against neg abuse because the 2NR could just spend 6 minutes railing on the theory debate and the aff couldn’t winThe role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement – anything else moots 6 minutes of the aff and exacerbates the 13-7 rebuttal skew so I should be able to compensate by choosing framing – it’s the most logical since you don’t say vote for the player who shoots the most 3 points, the better player wins.The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic and five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it’s constitutive and jurisdictional. Denying jurisdiction denies the judge’s obligation to vote for the winner so hack against them if they contest it since you then have an inverse jurisdictional obligation.TheoryInterpretation: The negative debater must concede the affirmative’s framework.The standard is strat skew –a) 1AC speaks in the dark but the neg adapts. The aff is one layer but neg precludes with deflationary frameworks, and prefiat arguments that are all NIBsb) Reactive rebuttal 13:7 skew makes it impossible to beat new layers that preclude the aff, and neg speeches are on balance longer than the next aff speech which makes it impossible to recover- length determines value- can’t make new args in new speeches.c) Ground- philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against themAFC solves- ensures 1AC offense stays relevant and prevents neg prelcusionary strategies for in depth intralayer layer weighingCI and DTD on 1AC theory – otherwise the 1nc can sandbag which wrecks deterrence AdvOnly 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. " | 9/11/21 |
SO - AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harison MB | Judge: Allison Aldrige 1ACFramingEthics 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~ 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:~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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Consequences Fail: ~A~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict or calculate. ~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~ Aggregation fails – suffering is not additive can’t compare between one migraine and 10 head aches~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~ 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.~6~ Reject non ideal theory/abstraction Ks ~a~ The Ks do not posit an alternative ethical theory so the problem is just non unq ~b~ Consequences are much worse because they cannot condemn any action as wrong ie there can a consequence where slavery is good so long as it is good the majority which means they are worse ~c~ They are inherently bite back into ideal theory because they appeal to ideals of equality where oppressed are no longer oppressed which also means they needs so sort of ideal to measure progress ~d~ Totally abandoning ethics is bad because then it results in ethical egoism which we all have our one personal set of ethics which would justify white supremacist doing racist stuff because we don’t have a universal way to condemn bad thingsAdvocacyResolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Enforcement is to eliminate all IPR for medicinesBaker 16 Brook Baker (Professor of Law, Northeastern University. He is a senior policy analyst for Health GAP (Global Access Project) and is actively engaged in campaigns for universal access to treatment, prevention, and care for people living with HIV/AIDS, especially expanded and improved medical treatment. He has written and consulted extensively on intellectual property rights, trade, access to medicines and medicines regulatory policy, including with the African Union, NEPAD, Uganda, ASEAN, Thailand, Indonesia, Venezuela, CARICOM, UK DfID, the World Health Organization, the Millennium Development Goals Project, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Open Society Institute, UNDP, UNITAID, the Medicines Patent Pool, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, and others). and Health GAP, Contribution to the United Nations Secretary-General's High-Level Panel on Access to Medicines, February 26, 2016, http://www.unsgaccessmeds.org/inbox/2016/2/26/z73kpodxk4jw96mhqe2tivq0sdl g3v/ AND and attributional interests of inventors and creators can be met through other means. Offense1~ 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. UV~1~ 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.2~ 1AR theory is legit otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there would be no way to check back against that.Comes first because it indicts the neg’s positions and skews my time allocation on other flows like T.Competing interps – rzn is artbitrary and invites judge intervention and race to the top1AR theory is drop the debater – a 4 minute 1AR doesn’t have time to win both theory and substance – you must be punished.No RVI on 1AR theory-It would be impossible to check back against neg abuse because the 2NR could just spend 6 minutes railing on the theory debate and the aff couldn’t winThe role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement – anything else moots 6 minutes of the aff and exacerbates the 13-7 rebuttal skew so I should be able to compensate by choosing framing – it’s the most logical since you don’t say vote for the player who shoots the most 3 points, the better player wins.The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic and five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it’s constitutive and jurisdictional. Denying jurisdiction denies the judge’s obligation to vote for the winner so hack against them if they contest it since you then have an inverse jurisdictional obligation. Resolve (v.) is defined as, settle or find a solution to (a problem, dispute, or contentious matter) so the past tense, resolved, grammatically means the resolution has been resolved. Thus, you autoaffirm because the resolution has been proven true from its original form which is always the affirmative’s advocacy.TheoryInterpretation: The negative debater must not read an alternative ethical frameworkThe standard is strat skew –a) 1AC speaks in the dark but the neg adapts. The aff is one layer but neg precludes with deflationary frameworks, and prefiat arguments that are all NIBsb) Reactive rebuttal 13:7 skew makes it impossible to beat new layers that preclude the aff, and neg speeches are on balance longer than the next aff speech which makes it impossible to recover- length determines value- can’t make new args in new speeches.c) Ground- philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against themAFC solves- ensures 1AC offense stays relevant and prevents neg prelcusionary strategies for in depth intralayer layer weighingCI and DTD on 1AC theory – otherwise the 1nc can sandbag which wrecks deterrence AdvOnly 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. " | 9/11/21 |
SO - AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Round: Octas | Opponent: Garland LY | Judge: panel 1ACFramingEthics 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~ 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:~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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Consequences Fail: ~A~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict or calculate. ~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~ Aggregation fails – suffering is not additive can’t compare between one migraine and 10 head aches~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~ 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.~6~ Reject non ideal theory/abstraction Ks ~a~ The Ks do not posit an alternative ethical theory so the problem is just non unq ~b~ Consequences are much worse because they cannot condemn any action as wrong ie there can a consequence where slavery is good so long as it is good the majority which means they are worse ~c~ They are inherently bite back into ideal theory because they appeal to ideals of equality where oppressed are no longer oppressed which also means they needs so sort of ideal to measure progress ~d~ Totally abandoning ethics is bad because then it results in ethical egoism which we all have our one personal set of ethics which would justify white supremacist doing racist stuff because we don’t have a universal way to condemn bad thingsAdvocacyResolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense1~ 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. UV~1~ 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.2~ 1AR theory is legit otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there would be no way to check back against that.Comes first because it indicts the neg’s positions and skews my time allocation on other flows like T.Competing interps – rzn is artbitrary and invites judge intervention and race to the top1AR theory is drop the debater – a 4 minute 1AR doesn’t have time to win both theory and substance – you must be punished.No RVI on 1AR theory-It would be impossible to check back against neg abuse because the 2NR could just spend 6 minutes railing on the theory debate and the aff couldn’t winThe role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement – anything else moots 6 minutes of the aff and exacerbates the 13-7 rebuttal skew so I should be able to compensate by choosing framing – it’s the most logical since you don’t say vote for the player who shoots the most 3 points, the better player wins.The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic and five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it’s constitutive and jurisdictional. Denying jurisdiction denies the judge’s obligation to vote for the winner so hack against them if they contest it since you then have an inverse jurisdictional obligation.AdvOnly 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. The sphere of intellectual property is a form of westernized biopiracy – intellectual property reduces indigenous knowledge and the global south to a means for profit which leads to the manipulation and ownership of life.Breske 2 Breske, Ashleigh. "Biocolonialism: Examining Biopiracy, Inequality, and Power." Spectra, vol. 6, no. 2, 2018, pp. 3–5., doi:10.21061/spectra.v6i2.a.6./SJKS Rehighlighted Justin AND not considered are their territorial rights to the resources on their lands.xxxv Method~1~ Ontological theories of blackness presumes a closed system which is an inaccurate description of contingent social systemsGordon 15 —- Lewis, Afro-Jewish philosopher, political thinker, educator, and musician, Professor at the University of Connecticut in Philosophy and Africana Studies, European Union Visiting Chair in Philosophy; Nelson Mandela Visiting Professor of Politics and International Studies at Rhodes University, South Africa; and Chairman of the Frantz Fanon awards committees of the Caribbean Philosophical Association, transcribed from https://youtu.be/UABksVE5BTQ, presenting and discussing his book "What Fanon Said" AND way or you can go another way. The system isn’t actually closed. ~2~ Libidinal economy arguments are wrong – implicit bias is socially produced and materially mediated, that means it’s subject to changeLester 12 ~Professor of Historical Geography, University of Sussex, 2012, Alan, "Humanism, race and the colonial frontier," Trans Inst Br Geogr NS 37 132–148~ AND ways those bodies themselves interact with each other. (2006, 10) | 9/12/21 |
SO - AC - Korsgaard v4Tournament: GREENHILL FALL CLASSIC | Round: 1 | Opponent: Harker AA | Judge: Matt Moorhead 1ACFramingEthics 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~ 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:~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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Consequences Fail: ~A~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict or calculate. ~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~ Aggregation fails – suffering is not additive can’t compare between one migraine and 10 head aches~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~ 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.~6~ Reject non ideal theory/abstraction Ks ~a~ The Ks do not posit an alternative ethical theory so the problem is just non unq ~b~ Consequences are much worse because they cannot condemn any action as wrong ie there can a consequence where slavery is good so long as it is good the majority which means they are worse ~c~ They are inherently bite back into ideal theory because they appeal to ideals of equality where oppressed are no longer oppressed which also means they needs so sort of ideal to measure progress ~d~ Totally abandoning ethics is bad because then it results in ethical egoism which we all have our one personal set of ethics which would justify white supremacist doing racist stuff because we don’t have a universal way to condemn bad thingsAdvocacyResolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense1~ 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. AdvOnly 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. American vaccine diplomacy is failing in Latin America – that allows for Chinese influence. Only the plan can return the world back to a US led order.Carman and Carl 6/15 ~Ezequiel and Joseph; Argentine lawyer and global health and trade policy consultant. Previously, he served as a legal advisor to the Ministry of Justice of Buenos Aires, an assistant professor of international public law at the Universidad Católica Argentina, and a research assistant at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law; Graduate of Liberty University, where he studied international relations and strategic international studies. He has worked for the U.S. Department of State and the Heritage Foundation; "A U.S. vaccine diplomacy strategy for Latin America and the Caribbean," Global Americans; 6/15/21; https://theglobalamericans.org/2021/06/a-u-s-vaccine-diplomacy-strategy-for-latin-america-and-the-caribbean/~~ Justin AND industry and and re-establish its leadership role among the Western powers. Latin America is still skeptical of Chinese aid but lack of US presence means it’s the only choice – recent influence means it’s try or die to capitalize on this weakness.Raimundo 9/3 ~Joshua; 9/3/21; Graduate of the World Journalism Institute; "China peddles influence with vaccines," World Tour, https://wng.org/roundups/china-peddles-influence-with-vaccines-1630687161~~ Justin AND Since early June, case and death rates in Uruguay have steadily declined. Chinese influence ends the liberal order.Cossu 7/16 ~Elena; Early-stage researcher for the MSCA Innovative Training Network FATIGUE, PhD candidate in economics at Corvinus University of Budapest and recently finished her year as a visiting researcher at University College London and at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Elena comes from a place culturally in between Germany and Italy. She has also had experience working in Greece, France, Latin America, Thailand, and Hungary. Elena is passionate about political and economic inequalities between states, and about understanding what prevents the political and economic convergence of different peripheries of the world; "In Latin America, Chinese vaccine diplomacy is directly challenging US’s declining authority," Scroll.in; 7/16/20; https://scroll.in/article/1000114/in-latin-america-chinese-vaccine-diplomacy-is-directly-challenging-uss-declining-authority~~ Justin AND "bad" and more concerned with the concrete opportunities different choices offer. Collapse of the liberal order causes extinction.Yulis 17 ~Max; Major in PoliSci, Penn Political Review; "In Defense of Liberal Internationalism," Penn Political Review; 4/8/17; http://pennpoliticalreview.org/2017/04/in-defense-of-liberal-internationalism/~~ Re-Cut Justin AND limelight to advocate the virtues of peace, stability, and human rights. Yes transition wars—-both sides miscalculate.Min-hyung Kim 20. Department of Political Science and International Relations, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea. "A real driver of US–China trade conflict: The Sino–US competition for global hegemony and its implications for the future" Emerald Insight. 02-04-2019. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ITPD-02-2019-003/full/html Re-Cut Justin AND its hegemony such as reducing its commitments abroad and appeasing a rising challenger. Chinese diplomatic influence escalates.Brands 20 ~Hal; Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a Bloomberg Opinion columnist; "Don’t Let Great Powers Carve Up the World Spheres of Influence Are Unnecessary and Dangerous," Foreign Affairs; 4/20/20; https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-04-20/dont-let-great-powers-carve-world~~ Justin AND and Napoleonic France have often ended, sooner or later, in war. UV1~ 1AR theory is legit otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there would be no way to check back against that.Comes first because it indicts the neg’s positions and skews my time allocation on other flows like T.Competing interps – rzn is artbitrary and invites judge intervention and race to the top1AR theory is drop the debater – a 4 minute 1AR doesn’t have time to win both theory and substance – you must be punished.No RVI on 1AR theory-It would be impossible to check back against neg abuse because the 2NR could just spend 6 minutes railing on the theory debate and the aff couldn’t win~2~ The role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement – anything else moots 6 minutes of the aff and exacerbates the 13-7 rebuttal skew so I should be able to compensate by choosing framing – it’s the most logical since you don’t say vote for the player who shoots the most 3 points, the better player wins.The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic and five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it’s constitutive and jurisdictional. Denying jurisdiction denies the judge’s obligation to vote for the winner so hack against them if they contest it since you then have an inverse jurisdictional obligation. | 9/18/21 |
SO - AC - Korsgaard v5Tournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 6 | Opponent: Perry JA | Judge: Grant Brown 1ACFramingEthics 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~ 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:~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. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~2~ Consequences Fail: ~A~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence so we can’t predict or calculate. ~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~ Aggregation fails – suffering is not additive can’t compare between one migraine and 10 head aches~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~ 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.~6~ Reject non ideal theory/abstraction Ks ~a~ The Ks do not posit an alternative ethical theory so the problem is just non unq ~b~ Consequences are much worse because they cannot condemn any action as wrong ie there can a consequence where slavery is good so long as it is good the majority which means they are worse ~c~ They are inherently bite back into ideal theory because they appeal to ideals of equality where oppressed are no longer oppressed which also means they needs so sort of ideal to measure progress ~d~ Totally abandoning ethics is bad because then it results in ethical egoism which we all have our one personal set of ethics which would justify white supremacist doing racist stuff because we don’t have a universal way to condemn bad thingsAdvocacyResolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.Offense1~ 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. Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory since the neg can be infinitely abusive and I can’t check back. Aff theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer since the 1ar is too short to win both theory and substance and reasonability bites intervention since it’s up to the judge to determine. No 2NR RVI, paradigm issues, theory, evidence, or new responses to AC arguments since they’d dump on it for 6 minutes and my 3-minute 2AR is spread too thin. No RVIs on AC arguments – incentivizes a 7 minute collapse that decks 1AR strategy.====~2~ Fairness is a voter: ==== ====A~ Debate’s a competitive game and requires objective evaluation. ==== B~ Fairness best coheres a winner since if one debater had ten minutes to speak and the other had three there would be incongruence that alters ability to judge the better debaterC~ Determines engagement in substance so it outweighs.====~3~ Weigh the case vs the K: ==== ====a~ Fairness – opposing frameworks moot our offense – there are infinite parts they could problematize which forces a 1ar restart==== ==== b~ Clash – Our scholarship is tied to the goodness of our framework and plan ==== ====c~ Role playing is key to better tackle problems of oppression and create tangible solutions.==== AND should be. And then we must be committed to making it so. AdvOnly 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. American vaccine diplomacy is failing in Latin America – that allows for Chinese influence. Only the plan can return the world back to a US led order.Carman and Carl 6/15 ~Ezequiel and Joseph; Argentine lawyer and global health and trade policy consultant. Previously, he served as a legal advisor to the Ministry of Justice of Buenos Aires, an assistant professor of international public law at the Universidad Católica Argentina, and a research assistant at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law; Graduate of Liberty University, where he studied international relations and strategic international studies. He has worked for the U.S. Department of State and the Heritage Foundation; "A U.S. vaccine diplomacy strategy for Latin America and the Caribbean," Global Americans; 6/15/21; https://theglobalamericans.org/2021/06/a-u-s-vaccine-diplomacy-strategy-for-latin-america-and-the-caribbean/~~ Justin AND industry and and re-establish its leadership role among the Western powers. Latin America is still skeptical of Chinese aid but lack of US presence means it’s the only choice – recent influence means it’s try or die to capitalize on this weakness.Raimundo 9/3 ~Joshua; 9/3/21; Graduate of the World Journalism Institute; "China peddles influence with vaccines," World Tour, https://wng.org/roundups/china-peddles-influence-with-vaccines-1630687161~~ Justin AND Since early June, case and death rates in Uruguay have steadily declined. Chinese influence ends the liberal order.Cossu 7/16 ~Elena; Early-stage researcher for the MSCA Innovative Training Network FATIGUE, PhD candidate in economics at Corvinus University of Budapest and recently finished her year as a visiting researcher at University College London and at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Elena comes from a place culturally in between Germany and Italy. She has also had experience working in Greece, France, Latin America, Thailand, and Hungary. Elena is passionate about political and economic inequalities between states, and about understanding what prevents the political and economic convergence of different peripheries of the world; "In Latin America, Chinese vaccine diplomacy is directly challenging US’s declining authority," Scroll.in; 7/16/20; https://scroll.in/article/1000114/in-latin-america-chinese-vaccine-diplomacy-is-directly-challenging-uss-declining-authority~~ Justin AND "bad" and more concerned with the concrete opportunities different choices offer. Collapse of the liberal order causes extinction.Yulis 17 ~Max; Major in PoliSci, Penn Political Review; "In Defense of Liberal Internationalism," Penn Political Review; 4/8/17; http://pennpoliticalreview.org/2017/04/in-defense-of-liberal-internationalism/~~ Re-Cut Justin AND limelight to advocate the virtues of peace, stability, and human rights. Yes transition wars—-both sides miscalculate.Min-hyung Kim 20. Department of Political Science and International Relations, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea. "A real driver of US–China trade conflict: The Sino–US competition for global hegemony and its implications for the future" Emerald Insight. 02-04-2019. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ITPD-02-2019-003/full/html Re-Cut Justin AND its hegemony such as reducing its commitments abroad and appeasing a rising challenger. Chinese diplomatic influence escalates.Brands 20 ~Hal; Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a Bloomberg Opinion columnist; "Don’t Let Great Powers Carve Up the World Spheres of Influence Are Unnecessary and Dangerous," Foreign Affairs; 4/20/20; https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-04-20/dont-let-great-powers-carve-world~~ Justin AND and Napoleonic France have often ended, sooner or later, in war. | 9/26/21 |
SO - AC - PandemicsTournament: GRAPEVINE CLASSIC | Round: 1 | Opponent: Presentation NR | Judge: Dylan Jones 1AC1AC – Adv – PandemicsOnly 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. 1AC – PlanPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics.Enforcement through limited IP waivers solve – patent term extensions are normal means and solves innovation and scale-up.Young and Potts-Szeliga 21 ~Roberta; Counsel in Seyfarth’s Litigation department and Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation practice groups in Los Angeles; Jamaica Potts-Szeliga; Partner in Seyfarth’s Litigation department and Intellectual Property and Patent Litigation practice groups in Washington, DC. She also provides advice on FDA regulatory issues and is part of the firm’s Health Care, Life Sciences, and Pharmaceuticals team; "A Third Option: Limited IP Waiver Could Solve Our Pandemic Vaccine Problems," IP Watch Dog; 7/21/21; https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2021/07/21/third-option-limited-ip-waiver-solve-pandemic-vaccine-problems/id=135732/~~ Justin AND deter the technological investment to create life-saving solutions in the future. The 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 1AC – FramingThe standard is maximizing expected wellbeing.1~ Actor spec—governments must use util because they don’t have intentions and are constantly dealing with tradeoffs—outweighs since different agents have different obligations—takes out calc indicts since they are empirically denied.2~ Death is bad and outweighs – a~ agents can’t act if they fear for their bodily security which constrains every ethical theory, b~ it destroys the subject itself – kills any ability to achieve value in ethics since life is a prerequisite which means it’s a side constraint since we can’t reach the end goal of ethics without life3~ Pleasure and pain are the starting point for moral reasoning—they’re our most baseline desires and the only things that explain the intrinsic value of objects or actionsMoen 16, Ole Martin (PhD, Research Fellow in Philosophy at University of Oslo). "An Argument for Hedonism." Journal of Value Inquiry 50.2 (2016): 267. AND notion of legal standing will outstrip the power relations that ground Pettit’s theory. 4~ Extinction outweighsMacAskill 14 ~William, Oxford Philosopher and youngest tenured philosopher in the world, Normative Uncertainty, 2014~ AND with the benefit of keeping one’s options open while one gains new information. Underview1~ Aff gets 1AR theory since the neg can be infinitely abusive and I can’t check back. It’s drop the debater since the 1ar is too short to win both theory and substance. No RVI or 2NR paradigm issues since they’d dump on it for 6 minutes and my 3-minute 2AR is spread too thin. Competing interps since reasonability is arbitrary and bites judge intervention.2~ Apocalyptic images challenge dominant power structures to create futures of social justiceJessica Hurley 17, Assistant Professor in the Humanities at the University of Chicago, "Impossible Futures: Fictions of Risk in the Longue Durée", Duke University Press, https://read.dukeupress.edu/american-literature/article/89/4/761/132823/Impossible-Futures-Fictions-of-Risk-in-the-Longue AND of the world. Just wait long enough. Stranger things will happen.¶ 3~ Youth participatory action research enables transformative resistance and is crucial to make activism workCammarota and Fine 08 AND means by which young people engage transformational resistance. (1-4) 4~ The aff is at the heart of the global south’s demands—-only governmental pressure creates the momentum necessary to fight profit motives and white nationalism.Hassan 21 ~Fatima; South African social justice activist and human rights lawyer. She worked on HIV/AIDS medicine access advocacy and litigation for many years with the AIDS Law Project and for the Treatment Action Campaign, clerked at the Constitutional Court of South Africa, served as special advisor to South Africa’s former minister of health and public enterprises, and is the founder and current head of the Health Justice Initiative based in Cape Town; "Don’t Let Drug Companies Create a System of Vaccine Apartheid," FP; 2/23/21; https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/23/dont-let-drug-companies-create-a-system-of-vaccine-apartheid/~~ Justin AND -19 medical products are accessible and affordable for everyone who needs them." 5~ Disease securitization is uniquely good to mobilize action.Mastroianni 17 ~Brian Mastroianni; Covers science and technology for CBSNews.com; "We are not ready": Experts warn world is unprepared for next Ebola-size outbreak," 3/16/17; CBS News; http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-says-world-underprepared-ebola-level-outbreaks/~~ Elmer Re-Cut Justin AND $60 billion a year in losses from future pandemics could be avoided. 7~ Alt actor fiat is a voting issue:a~ ground – moots the entire aff since you can just fiat an actor responsible for aff harms which means the aff can never weigh the caseb~ advocacy skills – in the real world we have to debate desirability with the actors we’re given, not assume other random people can solve the harmsc~ limits – there are infinite number of alt actors which means I can never reasonably predict which one you could read.Fairness is a voter- debate is a competitive activity that requires objective evaluationCI, DTD – anything else allows them to violate which moots the purpose of the shellNo RVI on 1AC theory- incentivizes a 7 minute 1NC dump that kills aff strat | 9/11/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
9/11/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/11/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/11/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/12/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/18/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/18/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/19/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/25/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/25/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/26/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/8/22 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/8/22 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
12/4/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
12/4/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
12/4/21 | vachen22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
|