Strake Jesuit Proctor Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 2 | Luke Del Fierro | Rebecca Anderson |
|
|
| |
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 5 | Andy Xu | Isabella Nadel |
|
|
| |
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 4 | Nathaniel John | Curtis Chang |
|
|
| |
| Disclosure | 8 | NA | NA |
|
| ||
| Loyola Invitational | 2 | Silver Creek KZ | Holden Bukowsky |
|
|
| |
| NA | Finals | NA | NA |
|
| ||
| NA | Finals | NA | NA |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 2 | Opponent: Luke Del Fierro | Judge: Rebecca Anderson 1AC-Stock |
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 5 | Opponent: Andy Xu | Judge: Isabella Nadel 1AC-Koorsgaard |
| 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | 4 | Opponent: Nathaniel John | Judge: Curtis Chang 1AC-Stock v2 |
| Loyola Invitational | 2 | Opponent: Silver Creek KZ | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1AC-Koorsgaard |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0-Contact InformationTournament: Disclosure | Round: 8 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA | 7/7/21 |
0-Disclosure InterpsTournament: NA | Round: Finals | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA Interpretation: At all TOC bid-distributing tournaments, debaters must disclose all constructive positions on open source with highlighting on the 2020-21 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them. Interpretation: At all TOC bid-distributing tournaments, debaters must disclose round reports on the 2020-21 NDCA LD wiki for every round they have debated this season. Round reports disclose which positions (AC, NC, K, T, Theory, etc.) were read/gone for in every speech. Interpretation: The affirmative must disclose the advocacy/plan text if they break new when pairings are released or at coin flip. If the debate occurs during flight 2 disclosure should occur at least 30 minutes before the round. Interpretation: The affirmative must disclose the framing text if they break new when pairings are released or at coin flip. If the debate occurs during flight 2 disclosure should occur at least 30 minutes before the round. Interpretation: If the affirmative debater discloses the aff 30 minutes before the round, the debater negating must disclose the NC strategy 15 minutes before the round. | 7/8/21 |
0-NavigationTournament: NA | Round: Finals | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA | 7/7/21 |
NSD-KoorsgaardTournament: 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | Round: 5 | Opponent: Andy Xu | Judge: Isabella Nadel 1AC-KoorsgaardEthics must begin a priori:~A~ Empirical uncertainty – evil demon could deceive us, dreaming, simulation, and inability to know others’ experience make empiricism an unreliable basis for universal ethics. Outweighs since it would be escapable since people could say they don’t experience the same.~B~ Constitutive Authority – practical reason is the only unescapable authority because to ask for why we should be reasoners concedes its authority since it uses reason – anything else is nonbinding and arbitrary.Next, the relevant feature of reason is universality – any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends i.e. if I want to eat ice cream, I must recognize that others may affect my pursuit of that end and demand the value of my end be recognized by others which also means universalizability acts as a side constraint on all other frameworks. It’s impossible to will a violation of freedom since deciding to do would will incompatible ends since it logically entails willing a violation of your own freedomThus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer:~A~ Practical identities – we find our lives worth living under practical identities such as student but that presupposes agency.Korsgaard 92 CHRISTINE M. Korsgaard 92 ~I am a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University, where I have taught since 1991. From July 1996 through June 2002, I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. (The current chair is Sean Kelly.) From 2004-2012, I was Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. (The current DGS is Mark Richard.) Before coming here, I held positions at Yale, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of Chicago, as well as visiting positions at Berkeley and UCLA. I served as President of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association in 2008-2009, and held a Mellon Distinguished Achievement Award from 2006-2009. I work on moral philosophy and its history, practical reason, the nature of agency, personal identity, normativity, and the ethical relations between human beings and the other animals~, "The Sources of Normativity", THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES Delivered at Clare Hall, Cambridge University 16-17 Nov 1992, BE AND identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids. That hijacks roles of the ballots since the judge is one such practical identity.~B~ Ethical frameworks must be theoretically legitimate. All frameworks are functionally topicality interpretations of the word ought so they must be theoretically justified: prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since only analytical arguments are required. That controls the internal link to other voters because a pre-req to debating is access to the activity.~C~ Performativity—freedom is the key to the process of justification of arguments. Willing that we should abide by their ethical theory presupposes that we own ourselves in the first place. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify a standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others.~D~ Even if ideal-theory is bad, the alternatives are far worse because they don’t rely on fixed principles and devolve into relativism at a particular space and time—you can’t measure something with a ruler constantly changing length, which means we need a standard to hold people to.Consequences fail: ~A~ They only judge actions after they occur, which fails action guidance ~B~ Every action has infinite stemming consequences, because every consequence can cause another consequence. Probability doesn’t solve because 1) Probability is improvable, as it relies on inductive knowledge, but induction from past events can’t lead to deduction of future events ~C~ Every action is infinitely divisible, only intents unify action because we intend the end point of an action – but consequences cannot determine what step of action is moral or not. ~D~ If you’re held responsible for things other than an intention ethics aren’t binding because there are infinite events occurring over which you have no control, so you can never be moral as you are permitting just action. ~E~ There’s no objective arbiter to evaluate consequences ~F~ You can’t aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don’t make a migraine AdvocacyI affirm: A just government ought to recognize the unconditional right to strike CPS and Pics affirm because they don’t disprove my general thesis. Ill defend neg preferences on specification as long as it doesn’t change the principle of my aff-check spec in CX.A just government is The word just can be defined as "acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good"(Just). By this definition, a just government is a government that acts for the good of the people and is morally upright.(cram) Meaning that by proving the plan is morally good we are defending a just government.Definition of unconditional right to strike:NLRB 85 ~National Labor Relations Board; "Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947: Volume 1," Jan 1985; https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=7o1tA''v4xwCandrdid=book-7o1tA''v4xwCandrdot=1~~ Justin AND health and welfare of our people in order to attain a selfish end. OffenseWorkers view their jobs as a means to an end of acquiring wealth. The unconditional right to strike ensures that companies can not coerce workers into lower wages.Dubin 56 Dubin, Robert. "Industrial Workers' Worlds: A Study of the ‘Central Life Interests’ of Industrial Workers." Social Problems, vol. 3, no. 3, Jan. 1956, pp. 131–142., org/stable/799133 . AND of this finding will be examined in the last section of this paper. Strikes prevent workers from being used as a meansLofaso 17 Anne Marie Lofaso, Workers’ Rights as Natural Human Rights, 71 U. Miami L. Rev. 565 (2017) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol71/iss3/3 ~Anne Marie Lofaso is Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development and a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law. In 2010, she was named WVU College of Law Professor of the Year.~ AND humanity of each person and the effect of our actions on others’ humanity. Put away your turns: strikes are an omission of actionBenjamin 78 Walter Benjamin, On Violence, Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings ~Walter Bendix Schönflies Benjamin was a German Jewish philosopher, cultural critic and essayist~ AND strike was not "so intended," and take emergency measures. UV~1~ Only univeralizable 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. ~2~ Permissibility and presumption affirm. ~a~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – means negating prohibits the aff action. ~b~ Time skew—the negative gets 7 minutes to respond to the 1AC and 6 to respond to the 1AR – this is structural skew, means it outweighs because it controls access to the ballot~3~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there’s no way to check against this – meta theory also precedes the evaluation of initial theory shells because it determines whether or not I could engage in theory in the first place. 1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance – you must be punished and no 2NR paradigm issues, theory, or RVIs because a) It becomes impossible to check NC abuse if you can dump on reasons the shell doesn't matter in the 2n. There will always be multiple conflicting interpretations of the resolution but the aff has to start somewhere, which means you should accept mine, and b) they have 6 minutes to go for them whereas I only have a 3 minute 2AR to respond so I get crushed on time skew. Reject theory on spikes since it would be a contradiction since they indict each other but prefer mine since they are lexically prior.~4~ Fairness comes before the K: ~A~ Probability-theory norms are set all the time since arguments go in and out of the meta but nobody ever stops oppression with one position ~B~ The judge has to indicate who won the round, fairness best coheres with this since if one debater had ten minutes to speak and the other had three there would be incongruence that alters ability to judge the truth value of the K so cross-applications don’t work. ~C~ Jurisdiction – every argument you make concedes the authority of fairness: i.e. that the judge will evaluate your arguments. Absent some judge-debater reciprocal relationship, they could just hack against or for you. ~D~ Prior question. My theory argument calls into question the ability to run the argument in the first place. They can’t say the same even if they criticize theory because theory makes rules of the game not just normative statements about what debaters should say ~E~ Fair testing. Judge their arguments knowing I wasn’t given a fair shot to answer them. Prefer theory takes out K because they could answer my arguments but I couldn’t answer theirs. Without testing their args, we don’t know if they’re valid, so you prefer fairness impacts on strength of link. Impact turns any critical education since a marketplace of ideas where we innovate and test ideas presumes equal access. ~F~ Fair version of K solves. My interp allows their position but not vice versa. That means I solve 99 of their impacts, but they solve none of mine. ~G~ Debaters quit – turns their dialogue args and maintains squo oppression of the dominant voices in debate – prereq~6~ Strikes have been a form of indigenous resistance and opportunity-Austrailia proves.Cohen 13 Cohen, Dylan. "Australian Aboriginal Workers Strike for Fair Wages and Equality, 1946-1949." Australian Aboriginal Workers Strike for Fair Wages and Equality, 1946-1949 | Global Nonviolent Action Database, 18 Oct. 2013, nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/australian-aboriginal-workers-strike-fair-wages-and-equality-1946-1949. AND whites in the 1966 Gurindji strike in Wave Hill in the Northern Territory. | 7/9/21 |
NSD-StockTournament: 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | Round: 2 | Opponent: Luke Del Fierro | Judge: Rebecca Anderson Advantage: Climate ChangeStrikes get stuff done and help solve rising inequality, but recent pushback from major corporations means that we are losing ground. Only ensuring unconditional right to strike will solveShierholz 20 Heidi Shierholz Posted January, 1-27-2020, "Weakened labor movement leads to rising economic inequality," Economic Policy Institute, https://www.epi.org/blog/weakened-labor-movement-leads-to-rising-economic-inequality//SJJK AND creating an economy that works for all, not just the privileged few. And Inequality is intimately linked with Biodiversity loss-robust statistical analysis provesMikkelson et. Al 17 Gregory M. Mikkelson , Andrew Gonzalez, Garry D. Peterson Economic Inequality, 5-17, "Economic Inequality Predicts Biodiversity Loss," No Publication, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0000444//SJJK AND economic inequality and biodiversity loss (see Table 1 and Materials and methods). Biodiversity loss is a massive risk for extinction due to climate change.UN 19 United Nations Sustainable Development, 5-19, "UN Report: Nature's Dangerous Decline 'Unprecedented'; Species Extinction Rates 'Accelerating'," https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report//SJJK AND have the means to ensure a sustainable future for people and the planet." Climate change causes extinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Advantage DemocracyGlobal democracy is collapsing now.Freedom House 3/3 ~Freedom House. Freedom House works to defend human rights and promote democratic change, with a focus on political rights and civil liberties. We act as a catalyst for freedom through a combination of analysis, advocacy, and action. Our analysis, focused on 13 central issues, is underpinned by our international program work. "New Report: The global decline in democracy has accelerated". 3-3-2021. . https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-global-decline-democracy-has-accelerated.~~ SJVM AND environments investigated government transgressions, and activists persisted in calling out undemocratic practices. The plan solves:1~ Civic engagement – strikes increase democratic participation which reinvigorates democracy.McElwee 15 ~Sean; Research Associate at Demos; "How Unions Boost Democratic Participation," The American Prospect; 9/16/15; https://prospect.org/labor/unions-boost-democratic-participation/~~ Justin AND a broad swath of the middle class largely unrepresented in the political process." Democratic backsliding causes extinction.Kendall-Taylor 16 ~Andrea; Deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, Senior associate in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington; "How Democracy’s Decline Would Undermine the International Order," CSIS; 7/15/16; https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-democracyE28099s-decline-would-undermine-international-order/~~ Justin AND policy, but it would ensure that we are having the right conversation. AdvocacyPlan text: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike. CX checks theory interps to avoid frivolous debates – otherwise I get an I meet.Definition of unconditional right to strike:NLRB 85 ~National Labor Relations Board; "Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947: Volume 1," Jan 1985; https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=7o1tA''v4xwCandrdid=book-7o1tA''v4xwCandrdot=1~~ Justin AND health and welfare of our people in order to attain a selfish end. We defend enforcement through the Illinois and Ohio models– an unconditional right is key, Malin 93 :Martin H. Malin, ~Martin H. Malin is co-director of the Institute for Law and the Workplace and teaches Labor Law, Employment Discrimination, Public Sector Employees, ADR in the Workplace, and Contracts. He received his B.A. from Michigan State University's James Madison College and his J.D. from George Washington University, where he was an editor of the law review and elected to the Order of the Coif. He joined the Chicago-Kent faculty in 1980 after serving as law clerk to United States District Judge Robert E. DeMascio in Detroit and on the faculty of Ohio State University.~ 1993, University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, "Public Employees' Right to Strike: Law and Experience" https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1702andcontext=mjlr LHP AV recut SJEP AND strain on the judiciary and maximizes incentives to settle at the bargaining table. FramingMorality- extemptThe standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer it:~1~ Experience is epistemic – it is how we empirically ground our existence. Pain is universally bad and pleasure is universally good.~2~ Actor specificity: util is the best for governments, which is the actor in the rez – multiple warrants:~a~ Governments must aggregate since every policy benefits some and harms others, which also means side constraints freeze action.~3~ Util is a lexical pre-requisite to any other framework-threats to bodily security and life preclude the ability for moral actors to effectively utilize and act upon other moral theories since they are in a constant state of crisis that inhibit the ideal moral conditions which other theories presuppose – so, util comes first and my offense outweighs theirs under their own framework.~4~ Extinction outweighsPummer 15 ~Theron, Junior Research Fellow in Philosophy at St. Anne's College, University of Oxford. "Moral Agreement on Saving the World" Practical Ethics, University of Oxford. May 18, 2015~ AT AND be acting very wrongly." (From chapter 36 of On What Matters) 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. | 7/8/21 |
NSD-Stock v2Tournament: 2021 NSD Camp Tournament | Round: 4 | Opponent: Nathaniel John | Judge: Curtis Chang ~1~ Right to Strike defends liberty for workers to both set and pursue their own ends and resist coercion from others, Gourevitch ’18:Gourevitch, Alex. "A Radical Defense of the Right to Strike." Jacobin 2018. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/right-to-strike-freedom-civil-liberties-oppression AND for the right to strike is to prioritize democratic freedoms over property rights. ~2~ The right to strike is consistent with negative rights – otherwise it requires direct government intervention to break the negotiation process that is already skewed towards employers, Sheppard ’96-takes out the third point:Terry Sheppard, "Liberalism and the Charter: Freedom of Association and the Right to Strike" (1996) 5 Dal J Leg Stud 117. Yoaks AND of Canada's major political parties have a great track record on protecting unions. ~3~ Right to strike ensures a process of collective bargaining – absent a right to strike it would literally force workers to work against their will, violating freedom, Croucher ’11:Croucher, Richard, Mark Kely, and Lilian Miles. "A Rawlsian basis for core labor rights." Comp. Lab. L. and Pol'y J. 33 (2011): 297. Yoaks AND substantive right to bargain collectively is assured under the second principle of justice. ~4~ Absent a right to strike, employers use workers as a mere means to an end because they give workers little say in the process of negotiating employment conditions which treats them as passive tools for the use of profit, a right to strike ensures that workers give continual meaningful consent to the employment relationship without threat of coercion~5~ Strikes prevent workers from being used as a meansLofaso 17 Anne Marie Lofaso, Workers’ Rights as Natural Human Rights, 71 U. Miami L. Rev. 565 (2017) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol71/iss3/3 ~Anne Marie Lofaso is Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development and a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law. In 2010, she was named WVU College of Law Professor of the Year.~ AND humanity of each person and the effect of our actions on others’ humanity. ~6~ Put away your turns: strikes are an omission of actionBenjamin 78 Walter Benjamin, On Violence, Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings ~Walter Bendix Schönflies Benjamin was a German Jewish philosopher, cultural critic and essayist~ AND strike was not "so intended," and take emergency measures. Advantage: Climate ChangeStrikes get stuff done and help solve rising inequality, but recent pushback from major corporations means that we are losing ground. Only ensuring unconditional right to strike will solveShierholz 20 Heidi Shierholz Posted January, 1-27-2020, "Weakened labor movement leads to rising economic inequality," Economic Policy Institute, https://www.epi.org/blog/weakened-labor-movement-leads-to-rising-economic-inequality//SJJK AND creating an economy that works for all, not just the privileged few. And Inequality is intimately linked with Biodiversity loss-robust statistical analysis provesMikkelson et. Al 17 Gregory M. Mikkelson , Andrew Gonzalez, Garry D. Peterson Economic Inequality, 5-17, "Economic Inequality Predicts Biodiversity Loss," No Publication, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0000444//SJJK AND economic inequality and biodiversity loss (see Table 1 and Materials and methods). Biodiversity loss is a massive risk for extinction due to climate change.UN 19 United Nations Sustainable Development, 5-19, "UN Report: Nature's Dangerous Decline 'Unprecedented'; Species Extinction Rates 'Accelerating'," https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report//SJJK AND have the means to ensure a sustainable future for people and the planet." Climate change causes extinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." Advantage DemocracyGlobal democracy is collapsing now.Freedom House 3/3 ~Freedom House. Freedom House works to defend human rights and promote democratic change, with a focus on political rights and civil liberties. We act as a catalyst for freedom through a combination of analysis, advocacy, and action. Our analysis, focused on 13 central issues, is underpinned by our international program work. "New Report: The global decline in democracy has accelerated". 3-3-2021. . https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-global-decline-democracy-has-accelerated.~~ SJVM AND environments investigated government transgressions, and activists persisted in calling out undemocratic practices. The plan solves:1~ Civic engagement – strikes increase democratic participation which reinvigorates democracy.McElwee 15 ~Sean; Research Associate at Demos; "How Unions Boost Democratic Participation," The American Prospect; 9/16/15; https://prospect.org/labor/unions-boost-democratic-participation/~~ Justin AND a broad swath of the middle class largely unrepresented in the political process." Democratic backsliding causes extinction.Kendall-Taylor 16 ~Andrea; Deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, Senior associate in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington; "How Democracy’s Decline Would Undermine the International Order," CSIS; 7/15/16; https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-democracyE28099s-decline-would-undermine-international-order/~~ Justin AND policy, but it would ensure that we are having the right conversation. AdvocacyPlan text: A just government ought to recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike. CX checks theory interps to avoid frivolous debates – otherwise I get an I meet.Definition of unconditional right to strike:NLRB 85 ~National Labor Relations Board; "Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947: Volume 1," Jan 1985; https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=7o1tA''v4xwCandrdid=book-7o1tA''v4xwCandrdot=1~~ Justin AND health and welfare of our people in order to attain a selfish end. We defend enforcement through the Illinois and Ohio models– an unconditional right is key, Malin 93 :Martin H. Malin, ~Martin H. Malin is co-director of the Institute for Law and the Workplace and teaches Labor Law, Employment Discrimination, Public Sector Employees, ADR in the Workplace, and Contracts. He received his B.A. from Michigan State University's James Madison College and his J.D. from George Washington University, where he was an editor of the law review and elected to the Order of the Coif. He joined the Chicago-Kent faculty in 1980 after serving as law clerk to United States District Judge Robert E. DeMascio in Detroit and on the faculty of Ohio State University.~ 1993, University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, "Public Employees' Right to Strike: Law and Experience" https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1702andcontext=mjlr LHP AV recut SJEP AND strain on the judiciary and maximizes incentives to settle at the bargaining table. FramingThe standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer it:~1~ Actor specificity: util is the best for governments, which is the actor in the rez – multiple warrants:~a~ Governments must aggregate since every policy benefits some and harms others, which also means side constraints freeze action.~b~ No act-omission distinction—governments are responsible for everything in the public sphere so inaction is implicit authorization of action: they have to yes/no bills, which means everything collapse to aggregation.~c~ No intent-foresight distinction – the actions we take are inevitably informed by predictions from certain mental states, meaning consequences are a collective part of the will.~2~ Util is a lexical pre-requisite to any other framework-threats to bodily security and life preclude the ability for moral actors to effectively utilize and act upon other moral theories since they are in a constant state of crisis that inhibit the ideal moral conditions which other theories presuppose – so, util comes first and my offense outweighs theirs under their own framework.~3~ Extinction outweighsPummer 15 ~Theron, Junior Research Fellow in Philosophy at St. Anne's College, University of Oxford. "Moral Agreement on Saving the World" Practical Ethics, University of Oxford. May 18, 2015~ AT AND be acting very wrongly." (From chapter 36 of On What Matters) ~4~ Reject calc indicts and util triggers permissibility arguments:~A~ Empirically denied—both individuals and policymakers carry out effective cost-benefit analysis which means even if decisions aren’t always perfect it’s still better than not acting at all. It allows us to say oppression is okay and not do anything about it. That is an independent voter, debate is impossible without people to participate when because people leave when you say oppression does not matter. Outweighs truth testing on sequencing – debate must be here first to truth testUnderview1~ 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. | 7/16/21 |
SEPTOCT-KoorsgaardTournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: 2 | Opponent: Silver Creek KZ | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1AC – FramingEthics 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 moralAdvocacyThus, the plan – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines. CP and PICs affirm because they do not disprove my general thesis. Offense1~ Property rights can’t be universalizable when they forgo the opportunity for an individual to access their own freedom. Medical patents restrict an individual to pursue freedom from death by foreclosing treatment.Merges 11 Merges, Robert P. Justifying Intellectual Property. Harvard University Press, 2011. SJEP AND given Kant’s text and the problem of pharmaceutical patents as I understand it. 3~ Property rights minimize the opportunity of innovation which limits individual freedom through creating monopolies. They also limit the use of tangible objects such as medicines for good purposes.Cernea and Uszkai 12 Cernea, Mihail-Valentin, and Radu Uszkai. The Clash between Global Justice and Pharmaceutical Patents: A Critical Analysis. 2012, the-clash-between-global-justice-and-drug-patents-a-critical-analysis.pdf. SJEP AND use of tangible objects which we acquired fully in line with market rules. Underview2~ 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 winTheoryInterpretation: 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 AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin AND , from trade-offs to pressurising, to make the waiver happen. Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What’s needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin AND to acquire the IP necessary for mRNA technologies— which is currently missing. Independently strategic patenting harms innovation incentives during pandemics – encourages reproduction of generics and decrease breakthroughs.Gurgula 20 ~Olga; Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London. She is also a Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Martin Programme on Affordable Medicines, University of Oxford; "Strategic Patenting by Pharmaceutical Companies – Should Competition Law Intervene?" Springer Link; 10/28/20; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-020-00985-0~~#Sec4~~ Justin AND at blocking follow-on innovation by competitors should raise competition law concerns. Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin AND by nuclear threat, with cascading effects on the risk of nuclear war. | 9/4/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
7/8/21 | evancproctor@gmailcom |
| |
7/9/21 | evancproctor@gmailcom |
| |
7/16/21 | evancproctor@gmailcom |
|