Strake Jesuit Xie Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 2 | Marlborough WR | Ishan Rereddy |
|
|
| |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 4 | Immaculate Heart BC | Matt Moorhead |
|
|
| |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | Octas | Southlake Carroll PK | Elijah Smith, Jack Quisenberry, Alex Dumas |
|
|
| |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 5 | Harker DS | Tom Evnen |
|
|
| |
| Loyola Invitational | 2 | Aragon ZA | Tej Gedela |
|
|
| |
| Loyola Invitational | 3 | Immaculate Heart BC | Abhinav Sinha |
|
|
| |
| Loyola Invitational | 6 | Ayala AM | Ishan Rereddy |
|
|
| |
| Loyola Invitational | Doubles | Bergen County AK | Michael Kurian, Aryan Jasani, Brett Cryan |
|
|
| |
| TFA State | 1 | Challenge Early JA | Phoenix Pittman |
|
|
| |
| TFA State | 3 | Memorial DXu | Holden Bukowsky |
|
|
| |
| TFA State | 3 | Memorial DXu | Holden Bukowsky |
|
|
| |
| TFA State | 5 | Plano East AW | Nelson Okunlola |
|
|
| |
| TFA State | Doubles | Westlake AK | Alexander Yoakum, Elmer Yang, Joshua George |
|
|
| |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 1 | Anderson NS | Angela Zhong |
|
|
| |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 3 | Westwood EG | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 5 | McNeil YM | Dylan Jones |
|
|
| |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 1 | Westside SY | Tajaih Robinson |
|
|
| |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 4 | Dulles VN | Javier Hernandez |
|
|
| |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 5 | Cooper City NR | Chris Randall |
|
|
| |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | Octas | Greenhill JW | Isaac Chao, Isaiah Salgado, Tyler Garrett |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 2 | Opponent: Marlborough WR | Judge: Ishan Rereddy 1ac - korsgaard |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Matt Moorhead 1ac - korsgaard |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | Octas | Opponent: Southlake Carroll PK | Judge: Elijah Smith, Jack Quisenberry, Alex Dumas 1ac - korsgaard |
| Greenhill Fall Classic | 5 | Opponent: Harker DS | Judge: Tom Evnen 1ac - agonism round reports |
| Loyola Invitational | 2 | Opponent: Aragon ZA | Judge: Tej Gedela 1ac - korsgaard |
| Loyola Invitational | 3 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Abhinav Sinha 1ac - korsgaard v2 |
| Loyola Invitational | 6 | Opponent: Ayala AM | Judge: Ishan Rereddy 1ac - korsgaard |
| Loyola Invitational | Doubles | Opponent: Bergen County AK | Judge: Michael Kurian, Aryan Jasani, Brett Cryan 1ac - korsgaard must disclose case cards |
| TFA State | 1 | Opponent: Challenge Early JA | Judge: Phoenix Pittman 1ac - poland |
| TFA State | 3 | Opponent: Memorial DXu | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1ac - poland cite boxes |
| TFA State | 3 | Opponent: Memorial DXu | Judge: Holden Bukowsky 1ac - poland cite boxes |
| TFA State | 5 | Opponent: Plano East AW | Judge: Nelson Okunlola 1ac - korsgaard |
| TFA State | Doubles | Opponent: Westlake AK | Judge: Alexander Yoakum, Elmer Yang, Joshua George 1ac - dysfluency |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 1 | Opponent: Anderson NS | Judge: Angela Zhong 1ac - korsgaard |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 3 | Opponent: Westwood EG | Judge: Breigh Plat 1ac - korsgaard |
| The 47th Churchill Classic | 5 | Opponent: McNeil YM | Judge: Dylan Jones 1ac - korsgaard |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 1 | Opponent: Westside SY | Judge: Tajaih Robinson 1ac - korsgaard |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 4 | Opponent: Dulles VN | Judge: Javier Hernandez 1ac - debris |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | 5 | Opponent: Cooper City NR | Judge: Chris Randall 1ac - debris |
| University of Houston Cougar Classic | Octas | Opponent: Greenhill JW | Judge: Isaac Chao, Isaiah Salgado, Tyler Garrett 1ac - debris |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Contact InfoTournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Strake Jesuit '22. He/him. If you have any questions or concerns about the round, please contact me - If there is any way you would like me to accommodate for your needs in any way before and during the round, just contact me! I'm happy to do so. Please tell me if there are any specific interps you would like me to meet before round (spikes on top, rob spec, etc.) This is terminal defense to your shell. Feel free to hmu if my wiki is acting up and there are some docs you can't access - I'll send them to you directly. Let me know any content warnings or pronouns before the round so we can make the debate as comfortable as possible for both of us. Note for TFA - Cites aren't working for Poland aff for some reason, hmu for it Good luck! | 3/12/22 |
1 - 1AC - DysfluencyTournament: TFA State | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Westlake AK | Judge: Alexander Yoakum, Elmer Yang, Joshua George TFA Dubs – 1AC v Westlake AKThe performance of the 1AC is a rejection of the resolution, a demonstration of disability's capacity in parasiticizing the neoliberal marketization that embraces a form of technocratic rationality that works to inevitably exclude the disabled learner. The very foundation of education is structured upon standardization and categorization that phenomalizes inclusion of the disabled body. Through the vision of the ideal student, the disabled learner is continuously rejected by neoliberal society and locked into a cycle of suffering.Goodley 07 ~Goodley, Dan. "Towards Socially Just Pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian Critical Disability Studies." Taylor and Francis, 1 May 2007, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13603110701238769~~ Cookie JX Communicative spheres such as debate are governed through biopolitical technologies of fluency which smooth over and systematically excludes semiotic interruptions in search for stable and univocal operations. This bends bodies to align their knowledge production with compulsory able-bodiedness. Thus the role of the ballot is to vote for the debater that best disrupts technologies of fluency.~1~ A legitimate advocacy is one that resists technologies of fluency – offense is just disrupting fluency comparatively Neoliberal biocapitalism operates through disabling certain bodies at the expense of enhancing others. Through the figure of the Child, biocapitalism sustains a reproductive order geared towards the future in the image of a better than able-bodied subject. In reality, this sacred Child is impossible to satisfy and requires the simultaneous death and enhancement of disability. This replicates a cruel optimism towards the promise of the future that only works to disable others…Fritsch 15 ~The Neoliberal Biopolitics of Disability: Towards Emergent Intracorporeal Practices by Kelly Fritsch JUNE 2015 UTDD~ Neoliberal biocapitalism forecloses futures by locking groups into existing insofar as they suffer. What is needed is a move away from the politics of recognition that creates a division between the abled and disabled towards gradations of debility and capacity that focus on ecologies of sensation and bodily capacities.Fritsch 15 ~The Neoliberal Biopolitics of Disability: Towards Emergent Intracorporeal Practices by Kelly Fritsch JUNE 2015 UTDD~ Gradations in suffering is how the 1ACs analysis operates. Semiocapitalism has shifted the terrain and now requires information to move quickly and effortlessly. The result is the capacitation of certain disabled bodies at the expense of debilitating dysfluent laborers.St. Pierre 2 ~Becoming Dysfluent: Fluency as Biopolitics and Hegemony Joshua St. Pierre Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies, Volume 11, Issue 3, 2017, pp. 339-356 (Article) Published by Liverpool University Press UTDD~ Voting affirmative engages in the embracement of disabled identities as rhizomes. Abandon the tree of hierarchical standardization and neoliberal biocapitalism that has forced the desire out of disability. Flatten its roots and reclaim its territory! Rhizomatic pedagogy redefines the disabled learner as becoming and connected to the rhizomatic assemblage. The desertion of standards and assessment creates simulating possibilities and paints the life of disability not as something to overcome but one that is worth living!Goodley 2 ~Goodley, Dan. "Towards Socially Just Pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian Critical Disability Studies." Taylor and Francis, 1 May 2007, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13603110701238769~~ Cookie JX The rhizomatic pedagogy challenges and rejects notions of disability created by neoliberal marketization. Through reessemblage of the figure of the Child into the Body without Organs, spaces of education receive an opportunity of redemption to refuse standardization and normalization and create a just future for everyone.Goodley 3 ~Goodley, Dan. "Towards Socially Just Pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian Critical Disability Studies." Taylor and Francis, 1 May 2007, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13603110701238769~~ Cookie JX Disability controls proximate cause to and explains all other violence – treating those as inferior is only justifiable through the guise of disability.Siebers et al. 17, Tobin, et al. (2017): Culture – Theory – Disability: Encounters between Disability Studies and Cultural Studies, Siebers began his career at the University of Michigan in 1980. He has authored ten books, including field-defining Disability Aesthetics (UM Press, 2010) and Disability Theory (UM Press, 2008). In 2004 Siebers was named the V. L. Parrington Collegiate Professor. Siebers was a Chair of the LSA Comparative Literature Program (currently the Department of Comparative Literature). In 2009, the University of Michigan Council for Disability Concerns presented Siebers with the James T. Neubacher Award in recognition of extraordinary leadership and service in support of the disability community. Siebers has been selected for fellowships by the Michigan Society of Fellows, the Guggenheim Foundation, the Mellon Foundation, and the Institute for the Humanities at the University of Michigan. Tobin Siebers passed away in January 2015. In March 2015, the University of Michigan announced the establishment of the Tobin Siebers Prize for Disability Studies in the Humanities "for best book-length manuscript on a topic of pressing urgency to Disability Studies in the humanities.", DOI: 10.14361/9783839425336-002 SJCPJG The judge has an ethical obligation to prioritize ableism in their impact calculus – Assumptions of ableism is always already inherent in any system of knowledge production thus ableism is always a prior question.Campbell 13 (Fiona Kumari Campbell, Adjunct Professor in the Department of Disability Studies at Griffith University. Wednesday 27 November 2013. Problematizing Vulnerability: Engaging Studies in Ableism and Disability Jurisprudence. Keynote speech at Disability at the Margins: Vulnerability, Empowerment and the Criminal Law) Daiyaß | 3/12/22 |
1 - K - ColorblindnessTournament: Greenhill Fall Classic | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harker DS | Judge: Tom Evnen The affirmative uses the phrase "colorblindness" in a critical argument inherently ableist because it positions the blind as immoral and ethically ignorant.Tremain, Shelley, PHD in Philosophy, published award winning author in disabled theory, and professor, Article title: Ableist language and philosophical associations, Pub 19 July 2011, http://www.newappsblog.com/2011/07/ableist-language-and-philosophical-associations.html / AHS PB Discourse shapes reality, so the kritik comes first. Sani 13:Shehu Sani ~Nigerian human rights activist~. "Hatred for Black People." 2013. | 9/21/21 |
1 - Theory - Cite BoxTournament: TFA State | Round: 3 | Opponent: Memorial DXu | Judge: Holden Bukowsky TheoryInterpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions in cite boxes on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki.Violation: see the screenshot in the doc. No novice excuses – you read complicated phil FWs, spec shells, you have great upperclassmen at Memorial, you didn't say cites broken, so you should have a thorough understanding of cites norms.
~a~ Prep Skew – prep becomes atrocious and difficult when you make people sift through 20 word docs to figure out which links you're reading and which impacts to prep. That outweighs – debates can't be won without prep.~b~ Clash – encourages debaters to hide tricky arguments in their open source docs knowing how hard it is to go through them. That outweighs – clash is intrinsic to education in debate.~c~ Inclusion – disadvantaged debaters have computers more prone to lag and even 3 or 4 docs can crash the program for them—outweighs because debate had to be accessible for you to participate.Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Outweighs because each debater assumes the judge fairly evaluates their arguments.Drop the debater – a~ deter future abuse and b~ we didn't read this against an argument.Competing interps – ~a~ reasonability is arbitrary and encourages judge intervention since there's no clear norm, ~b~ it creates a race to the top where we create the best possible norms for debate.No RVIs on 1AC theory – a~ it gives the 1NC 7 minutes to dump on the shell which the 4 minute 1AR cannot come back from, b~ it encourages the 1NC to go all in on theory which leads to maximal substance crowdout, c~ 1AR is too short to win theory and substance so 1AC theory has to be no risk | 3/11/22 |
1 - Theory - Cite BoxTournament: TFA State | Round: 3 | Opponent: Memorial DXu | Judge: Holden Bukowsky TheoryInterpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions in cite boxes on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki.Violation: see the screenshot in the doc. No novice excuses – you read complicated phil FWs, spec shells, you have great upperclassmen at Memorial, you didn't say cites broken, so you should have a thorough understanding of cites norms.
~a~ Prep Skew – prep becomes atrocious and difficult when you make people sift through 20 word docs to figure out which links you're reading and which impacts to prep. That outweighs – debates can't be won without prep.~b~ Clash – encourages debaters to hide tricky arguments in their open source docs knowing how hard it is to go through them. That outweighs – clash is intrinsic to education in debate.~c~ Inclusion – disadvantaged debaters have computers more prone to lag and even 3 or 4 docs can crash the program for them—outweighs because debate had to be accessible for you to participate.Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Outweighs because each debater assumes the judge fairly evaluates their arguments.Drop the debater – a~ deter future abuse and b~ we didn't read this against an argument.Competing interps – ~a~ reasonability is arbitrary and encourages judge intervention since there's no clear norm, ~b~ it creates a race to the top where we create the best possible norms for debate.No RVIs on 1AC theory – a~ it gives the 1NC 7 minutes to dump on the shell which the 4 minute 1AR cannot come back from, b~ it encourages the 1NC to go all in on theory which leads to maximal substance crowdout, c~ 1AR is too short to win theory and substance so 1AC theory has to be no risk | 3/11/22 |
1 - Theory - Must Disclose Cards on CaseTournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Bergen County AK | Judge: Michael Kurian, Aryan Jasani, Brett Cryan Interpretation: Debaters must disclose all cards read on case for each constructive position on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them.Violation: see screenshot – a side by side of the 1N Andrew read and the 1N Andrew disclosed in trips
1~ Debate resource inequities—you'll say people will steal cards, but that's good—it's the only way to truly level the playing field for students such as novices in under-privileged programs – it equals the playing field.2~ Evidence ethics – open source is the only way to verify pre-round that cards aren't miscut or highlighted or bracketed unethically. That's a voter – maintaining ethical ev practices is key to being good academics and we should be able to verify you didn't cheat3~ Depth of clash – it allows debaters to have nuanced researched objections to their opponents evidence before the round at a much faster rate, which leads to higher quality ev comparison – outweighs cause thinking on your feet is NUQ but the best quality responses come from full access.4~ Strat skew – kills preparation for case cards which means they win by element of surprise every time – furthered by them baiting debaters into overallocating on 1NC positions and undercovering case.Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Outweighs because each debater assumes the judge fairly evaluates their arguments.Drop the debater – a~ deter future abuse and b~ we didn't read this against an argument.Competing interps – ~a~ reasonability is arbitrary and encourages judge intervention since there's no clear norm, ~b~ it creates a race to the top where we create the best possible norms for debate.No RVIs on 1AC theory – a~ it gives the 1NC 7 minutes to dump on the shell which the 4 minute 1AR cannot come back from, b~ it encourages the 1NC to go all in on theory which leads to maximal substance crowdout, c~ 1AR is too short to win theory and substance so 1AC theory has to be no risk | 9/6/21 |
1 - Theory - Round ReportsTournament: Greenhill Fall Classic | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harker DS | Judge: Tom Evnen Interp: Debaters must disclose round reports on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki for every round they have debated this season. Round reports disclose which positions were read/gone for in every speech.Violation: screenshot in the doc – they don't disclose 1AR and 2AR strategy on both wikis Standards:1~ Level Playing Field – big schools can go around and scout and collect flows but independents are left in the dark so round reports are key to prep- they give you an idea of overall what layers debaters like going for so you can best prepare your strategy when you hit them.2~ Strategy Education – round reports help novices understand the context in which positions are read by good debaters and help with brainstorming potential 1NCs vs affs – helps compensate for kids who can't afford coaches to prep out affs.Accessibility first – you had to access debate to read the aff. Debate loses all pedagogical value and becomes useless if no one can access it.Drop the debater—the abuse has already occurred and my time allocation has shifted—also the shell indicts your whole aff—justifies severance which skews my strat.Use competing interps—~a~ leads to a race to the top since we figure out the best possible norm~b~ it avoids judge intervention since there's a clear briteline.~c~ reasonability cause a race to the bottom where debaters push the brightline and become maximally abusive~d~ it's not frivolous – there's a reason round reports are a normNo RVIs on 1AC theory – a~ it gives the 1NC 7 minutes to dump on the shell which the 4 minute 1AR cannot come back from, b~ it encourages the 1NC to go all in on theory which leads to maximal substance crowdout, c~ 1AR is too short to win theory and substance so 1AC theory has to be no risk | 9/21/21 |
JanFeb - 1AC - DebrisTournament: University of Houston Cougar Classic | Round: 4 | Opponent: Dulles VN | Judge: Javier Hernandez 1AC – PlanPlan – The appropriation of outer space through the production of space debris by private entities is unjust.Revising the Outer Space Treaty curbs the impact of space debris – timeframe is crucial.Shah 20 – Sachin, 8/30/20, ~"Aug 30 The International Legal Regulation of Space Debris," CORNELL UNDERGRADUATE LAW and SOCIETY REVIEW, Administrative, Policy, Technology, https://www.culsr.org/articles/the-international-legal-regulation-of-space-debris~~ Justin Private entities are non-governmental.Dunk 11 – Frans G. von der Dunk, 2011, ~"The Origins of Authorisation: Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty and International Space Law," University of Nebraska~ Justin Exemptions destroy the coercive power of legal regimes – causes circumvention across the board.Hickman and Dolman 2 – John and Everett, 2002, Associate professor in the Department of Government and International Studies at Berry College in Mt. Berry, ~"Resurrecting the Space Age: A State–Centered Commentary on the Outer Space Regime," Volume 21 Number 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/014959302317350855~~ Elmer Recut Justin 1AC – AdvThe advantage is Debris –Privatization of space leads to unchecked debris.Muelhaupt et al. 19 – Theodore, Marlon Sorge, Jamie Morin, and Robert Wilson, 6/18/19, Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies, Center for Space Policy and Strategy, The Aerospace Corporation, 30 year Space Systems Analyst and Operator, ~"Space traffic management in the new space era," Journal of Space Safety Engineering, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246889671930045X?via3Dihub~~ Justin Feedback loops of technology cause increasing development and debris.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 Invisible tipping points trigger the Kessler Syndrome.Thompson 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 Privatization exponentially increases the curve but ending dangerous missions stops 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 Models are rigorous and robust – inserted below.—-To clarify this is the methodology for above chart. Debris triggers miscalculated war.Peter Dockrill 16. Award-winning science and technology journalist. "Space Junk Accidents Could Trigger Armed Conflict, Study Finds." https://www.sciencealert.com/space-junk-accidents-could-trigger-armed-conflict-expert-warns. Specifically—-China, Iran, and Noko.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 *Brackets added for ableist language ====No checks on escalation.==== Any nuclear war causes extinction – ice age and famine.Steven Starr 15 ~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 worked with the Swiss, Chilean, and Swedish governments in support of their efforts at the United Nations to eliminate thousands of high-alert, launch-ready U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. "Nuclear War: An Unrecognized Mass Extinction Event Waiting To Happen." Ratical. March 2015. https://ratical.org/radiation/NuclearExtinction/StevenStarr022815.html~~ TG Satellites solve the grid and every extinction threat.Pellegrino and Stang 16 —- Massimo Pellegrino, Master's Degree in Space Studies from ISU, with Gerald Stang, Senior Associate Analyst at the EUISS, holds BSc and MSc degrees in chemical engineering from the University of Saskatchewan and an MA in international affairs from the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University ("Space Security for Europe", EU Institute for Security Studies, published July 2016, https://www.iss.europa.eu/content/space-security-europe, accessed 7-10-2019) bm Grid collapse causes extinction.Friedemann 16 —- Alice, transportation expert, founder of EnergySkeptic.com, citing Dr Peter Vincent Pry, executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, a Congressional advisory board dedicated to achieving protection of the United States from electromagnetic pulse and other threats, ("Electromagnetic pulse threat to infrastructure (U.S. House hearings)", 1-24-2016, http://energyskeptic.com/2016/the-scariest-u-s-house-session-ever-electromagnetic-pulse-and-the-fall-of-civilization/) Externally, acidification.Land et al 15 —- Phys.org, citing a study sanctioned by the University of Exeter by Peter E. Land, Jamie D. Shutler, Helen S. Findlay, Fanny Girard-Ardhuin, Roberto Sabia, Nicolas Reul, Jean-Francois Piolle, Bertrand Chapron, Yves Quilfen, Joseph Salisbury, Douglas Vandemark, Richard Bellerby, and Punyasloke Bhadury ("Satellite images reveal ocean acidification from space," 2-17-2015, https://phys.org/news/2015-02-satellite-images-reveal-ocean-acidification.html, accessed 8-24-2019) bm Extinction.Merchant 15 (Brian, Senior Editor, Motherboard at VICE Media, Inc. He's appeared on CNN, MSNBC, BBC World News, and NPR, VICE, April 9, 2015, http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-last-time-our-oceans-got-this-acidic-it-drove-earths-greatest-extinction) Framing1~ The standard is maximizing expected well-being.2~ No intent-foresight distinction – the actions we take are inevitably informed by predictions from certain mental states, meaning consequences are inevitable and necessary to ethics.3~ Death is bad and outweighs – 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 on ethics4~ Extinction outweighsMacAskill 14 ~William, Oxford Philosopher and youngest tenured philosopher in the world, Normative Uncertainty, 2014~ 5~ Pleasure and pain are intrinsic value and disvalue – everything else regresses – robust neuroscience.Blum et al. 18 6~ Only consequentialism explains degrees of wrongness—if I break a promise to meet up for lunch, that is not as bad as breaking a promise to take a dying person to the hospital. Only the consequences of breaking the promise explain why the second one is much worse than the first which is the most intuitive. That outweighs:~A~ Parsimony – metaphysics relies on long chains of questionable claims that make conclusions less likely.~B~ Hijacks – intuitions are inevitable since even every framework must take some unjustified assumption as a starting point.~C~ Empirics – thousands of years of history prove that it's probably not good to keep our hands on hot stoves.7~ The 1NC cedes the celestial commons to the hands of global imperialism. Only IR education can create momentum to demilitarize space.Raymond Duvall 6 – Professor of Political Science @ Univ of Minnesota, Taking Sovereignty Out of This World: Space Weapons and Empire of the Future, October 2006, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/111193/Taking20Sovereignty20Out20of20This20World.pdf Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on something~2~ Presumption and permissibility affirm –A~ We always default to assuming something true until proven false ie if I told you my name is Jarvis you would believe meB~ If agents have to justify why every action is morally good we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral i.e. drinking waterC~ Lack of offense means it's ok to do something, but it's never okay to do something which is prohibited which means that the neg has to win offense. | 1/15/22 |
JanFeb - 1AC - Debris v2Tournament: University of Houston Cougar Classic | Round: 5 | Opponent: Cooper City NR | Judge: Chris Randall 1AC – PlanPlan – The appropriation of outer space through the production of space debris by private entities is unjust.Revising the Outer Space Treaty curbs the impact of space debris – timeframe is crucial.Shah 20 – Sachin, 8/30/20, ~"Aug 30 The International Legal Regulation of Space Debris," CORNELL UNDERGRADUATE LAW and SOCIETY REVIEW, Administrative, Policy, Technology, https://www.culsr.org/articles/the-international-legal-regulation-of-space-debris~~ Justin Private entities are non-governmental.Dunk 11 – Frans G. von der Dunk, 2011, ~"The Origins of Authorisation: Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty and International Space Law," University of Nebraska~ Justin Exemptions destroy the coercive power of legal regimes – causes circumvention across the board.Hickman and Dolman 2 – John and Everett, 2002, Associate professor in the Department of Government and International Studies at Berry College in Mt. Berry, ~"Resurrecting the Space Age: A State–Centered Commentary on the Outer Space Regime," Volume 21 Number 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/014959302317350855~~ Elmer Recut Justin 1AC – AdvThe advantage is Debris –Privatization of space leads to unchecked debris.Muelhaupt et al. 19 – Theodore, Marlon Sorge, Jamie Morin, and Robert Wilson, 6/18/19, Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies, Center for Space Policy and Strategy, The Aerospace Corporation, 30 year Space Systems Analyst and Operator, ~"Space traffic management in the new space era," Journal of Space Safety Engineering, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246889671930045X?via3Dihub~~ Justin Feedback loops of technology cause increasing development and debris.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 Invisible tipping points trigger the Kessler Syndrome.Thompson 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 Privatization exponentially increases the curve but ending dangerous missions stops 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 Models are rigorous and robust – inserted below.—-To clarify this is the methodology for above chart. Debris triggers miscalculated war.Peter Dockrill 16. Award-winning science and technology journalist. "Space Junk Accidents Could Trigger Armed Conflict, Study Finds." https://www.sciencealert.com/space-junk-accidents-could-trigger-armed-conflict-expert-warns. Specifically—-China, Iran, and Noko.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 *Brackets added for ableist language ====No checks on escalation.==== Any nuclear war causes extinction – ice age and famine.Steven Starr 15 ~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 worked with the Swiss, Chilean, and Swedish governments in support of their efforts at the United Nations to eliminate thousands of high-alert, launch-ready U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. "Nuclear War: An Unrecognized Mass Extinction Event Waiting To Happen." Ratical. March 2015. https://ratical.org/radiation/NuclearExtinction/StevenStarr022815.html~~ TG Corporate colonialism also locks the Global South out of space, which internal link turns any negative offense because it magnifies interstellar inequality.Stockwell 20 ~Sam Stockwell is a research assistant at RAND Europe working in the area of defence, security and infrastructure. His research interests include terrorism and counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, emerging technologies in conflict environments, and space security. Prior to RAND, Stockwell was a research assistant at The Henry Jackson Society, a security think tank, where he studied the impact of coronavirus on online extremist content. He has also worked with lecturers at the University of East Anglia on Brexit-related projects. Stockwell achieved a Distinction at King's College London in conflict, security and development studies, specialising in far-right terrorism and cyber security. He holds a First Class B.A. (Hons) degree in politics from the University of East Anglia, where he also received The Thomas Paine Prize in Politics for achieving consistently high marks on assignments throughout his course.) "Legal 'Black Holes' in Outer Space: The Regulation of Private Space Companies" E-International Relations, July 20, 2020~ RM Satellites solve the grid and every extinction threat.Pellegrino and Stang 16 —- Massimo Pellegrino, Master's Degree in Space Studies from ISU, with Gerald Stang, Senior Associate Analyst at the EUISS, holds BSc and MSc degrees in chemical engineering from the University of Saskatchewan and an MA in international affairs from the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University ("Space Security for Europe", EU Institute for Security Studies, published July 2016, https://www.iss.europa.eu/content/space-security-europe, accessed 7-10-2019) bm Grid collapse causes extinction.Friedemann 16 —- Alice, transportation expert, founder of EnergySkeptic.com, citing Dr Peter Vincent Pry, executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, a Congressional advisory board dedicated to achieving protection of the United States from electromagnetic pulse and other threats, ("Electromagnetic pulse threat to infrastructure (U.S. House hearings)", 1-24-2016, http://energyskeptic.com/2016/the-scariest-u-s-house-session-ever-electromagnetic-pulse-and-the-fall-of-civilization/) Externally, acidification.Land et al 15 —- Phys.org, citing a study sanctioned by the University of Exeter by Peter E. Land, Jamie D. Shutler, Helen S. Findlay, Fanny Girard-Ardhuin, Roberto Sabia, Nicolas Reul, Jean-Francois Piolle, Bertrand Chapron, Yves Quilfen, Joseph Salisbury, Douglas Vandemark, Richard Bellerby, and Punyasloke Bhadury ("Satellite images reveal ocean acidification from space," 2-17-2015, https://phys.org/news/2015-02-satellite-images-reveal-ocean-acidification.html, accessed 8-24-2019) bm Extinction.Merchant 15 (Brian, Senior Editor, Motherboard at VICE Media, Inc. He's appeared on CNN, MSNBC, BBC World News, and NPR, VICE, April 9, 2015, http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-last-time-our-oceans-got-this-acidic-it-drove-earths-greatest-extinction) FramingThe standard is maximizing expected well-being.3~ Death is bad and outweighs – 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 on ethics4~ Extinction outweighsMacAskill 14 ~William, Oxford Philosopher and youngest tenured philosopher in the world, Normative Uncertainty, 2014~ 5~ Pleasure and pain are intrinsic value and disvalue – everything else regresses – robust neuroscience.Blum et al. 18 Method~1~ Realism is inevitable, valuable, and abandoning it recreates the same dichotomies they attempt to break down - NCR = Neoclassical Realizm
~2~ The 1NC cedes the celestial commons to the hands of global imperialism. Only IR education can create momentum to demilitarize space.Raymond Duvall 6 – Professor of Political Science @ Univ of Minnesota, Taking Sovereignty Out of This World: Space Weapons and Empire of the Future, October 2006, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/111193/Taking20Sovereignty20Out20of20This20World.pdf ~3~ Policy education is key to advocacy – that outweighs on portable skills. The educational skills generated from role playing is key to solving impacts in the real world – policy views problems from diverse perspectives, so we can better tackle problems of oppression and create tangible solutions.====Nixon 2K Makani Themba-Nixon, Executive Director of The Praxis Project. "Changing the Rules: What Public Policy Means for Organizing." Colorlines 3.2, 2000. ==== Getting It in Writing Much of the work of framing what we stand for takes place in the shaping of demands. By getting into the policy arena in a proactive manner, we can take our demands to the next level. Our demands can become law, with real consequences if the agreement is broken. After all the organizing, press work, and effort, a group should leave a decision maker with more than a handshake and his or her word. Of course, this work requires a certain amount of interaction with "the suits," as well as struggles with the bureaucracy, the technical language, and the all-too-common resistance by decision makers. Still, if it's worth demanding, it's worth having in writing-whether as law, regulation, or internal policy. From ballot initiatives on rent control to laws requiring worker protections, organizers are leveraging their power into written policies that are making a real difference in their communities. Of course, policy work is just one tool in our organizing arsenal, but it is a tool we simply can't afford to ignore. Making policy work an integral part of organizing will require a certain amount of retrofitting. We will need to develop the capacity to translate our information, data, stories that are designed to affect the public conversation ~and~. Perhaps most important, we will need to move beyond fighting problems and on to framing solutions that bring us closer to our vision of how things should be. And then we must be committed to making it so. | 1/15/22 |
JanFeb - 1AC - KorsgaardTournament: The 47th Churchill Classic | Round: 1 | Opponent: Anderson NS | Judge: Angela Zhong FramingEthics 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.~D~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible.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~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine ~3~ 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.~4~ 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.~5~ Reject endorsement of consequentalism: a~ it justifies atrocities since it justifies allowing us to harm some for the benefit of others – even if they spew some pain quantifiability argument that doesn't solve since there are still instances some get great benefit from others harm. b~ it can't justify intrinsic wrongness – We can't know whether our action was good until we've evaluated the states of affairs they've produced since it's based on the outcome of the action, i.e., if asked the question "is genocide okay?" a utilitarian would not be able to say yes because there are situations in which it would be morally obligatory to do so if it maximized pleasure. Probability doesn't solve because that just allows for moral error and freezes action while attempting to calculate the perfect decision. c~ Drop them for ethics based in preservation–it creates a survival-at-all-costs mentality that justifies violence and makes debate unsafe.Callahan 73 Daniel Callahan, Fellow at the Institute of Society and Ethics, 1973 The Tyranny of Survival, Pages 91-93) SJCPJG 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 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 ~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 ~2~ Extending neoliberal polices in space violate universal law through continued injustice.Segobaetso 18 Segobaetso, Benjamin. Ethical Implications of the Colonization, Privatization and Commercialization of Outer Space. SJEP ~3~ The categorical imperative rejects states and companies desires to profit off of space for themselves.Wurth 19Wurth, Nicolas. "SPACE ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL SPACE LAW: ADVANCEMENT AND ENFORCEABILITY." University of Luxembourg , 2019. SJEP Underview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water is not morally right or wrong but if I had to justify my action every time I decided upon a course of action I would never be able to make decisions.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ they get to go for their shell and beat back mine in the long 2NR but the 2AR is too short to do bothAdvantageThe 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 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 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 *Brackets added for ableist language Any nuclear war causes extinction – ice age and famine.Steven Starr 15 ~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 worked with the Swiss, Chilean, and Swedish governments in support of their efforts at the United Nations to eliminate thousands of high-alert, launch-ready U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. "Nuclear War: An Unrecognized Mass Extinction Event Waiting To Happen." Ratical. March 2015. https://ratical.org/radiation/NuclearExtinction/StevenStarr022815.html~~ TG | 1/8/22 |
JanFeb - 1AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: The 47th Churchill Classic | Round: 3 | Opponent: Westwood EG | Judge: Breigh Plat FramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Epistemology – rational deliberation of educational concepts is necessary to interpret other arguments since it's a prerequisite to interpreting epistemological concepts and it's the terminal impact of debate as education is the only portable impact.~3~ Procedure – reason is a side constraint on debate since otherwise we can't refute – responding to this concedes the authority of reason since you're reasoning via logical deliberation.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a priori d) past experiences have no effect on causality or internal link to continuity, i.e. raining yesterday doesn't mean rain today.Duty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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~ Weighing practices is incoherent because it relies on an assessment of ends, which relies on a further assessment. A practice that negates is not contradictory to a practice that affirms, and thus proving my end affirms is sufficient. So, proving the converse of the resolution is not sufficient to disprove the resolution's truth.~3~ 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.~4~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine 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 Private entities are non-governmental.Dunk 11 – Frans G. von der Dunk, 2011, ~"The Origins of Authorisation: Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty and International Space Law," University of Nebraska~ Justin Exemptions destroy the coercive power of legal regimes – causes circumvention across the board.Hickman and Dolman 2 – John and Everett, 2002, Associate professor in the Department of Government and International Studies at Berry College in Mt. Berry, ~"Resurrecting the Space Age: A State–Centered Commentary on the Outer Space Regime," Volume 21 Number 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/014959302317350855~~ Elmer Recut Justin 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 ~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 ~2~ Extending neoliberal polices in space violate universal law through continued injustice.Segobaetso 18 Segobaetso, Benjamin. Ethical Implications of the Colonization, Privatization and Commercialization of Outer Space. SJEP ~3~ The categorical imperative rejects states and companies desires to profit off of space for themselves.Wurth 19Wurth, Nicolas. "SPACE ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL SPACE LAW: ADVANCEMENT AND ENFORCEABILITY." University of Luxembourg , 2019. SJEP Underview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water is not morally right or wrong but if I had to justify my action every time I decided upon a course of action I would never be able to make decisions.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance which justifies evaluating the debate after the 1AR to alleviate time skew, ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on somethingIf I win one layer, vote aff a) they have 7 minutes to uplayer and nullify my offense b) forces engagement with the aff since they have to defend all arguments which means they read better ones. All neg interps are counter interps since the aff takes an implicit stance on every issue which means you need an RVI to become offensive. No RVIs because aff speeches are too short to develop offense that's not no risk.You should accept all aff interps and assume I meet neg theory since the aff speaks in the dark and I have to take a stance on something, you can at least react and adapt. No neg combo shells since they destroy substantive debate because no matter how fair I am you can always find a violation and avoid clash. Reject 1NC responses– you're psychologically skewed to believe them because the 1NC is longer. Reject meta-theory – it's infinitely regressive and never resolves abuse.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. 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.No new 2NR responses – it leads to infinite sandbagging and avoids clash since they have 6 minutes – also infinite abuse since the short 1AR is premised off 1NC concessions.~3~ Affirming is harder – link turns all neg theory arguments and means we get a permutation against anything because we can't sufficiently respond A~ Neg is reactive – they tailor the 1NC before the round to exploit the aff's weakness. Not reciprocal – affs enter the round unaware. Also means no neg weighing – it supercharges the abuse since they can collapse in the 2NR and outweigh any turns I make. B~ Aff extends twice – takes valuable time from already most time-pressed speeches. That means reject neg fairness concerns – the aff is structurally skewed from the start so they have no excuse – responding to this assumes you get neg fairness which is your fault because you introduced the contradiction so you still vote aff. C~ 1AR is split between multiple layers while the 2NR goes for one thing – we get destroyed on time skew.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 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 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 *Brackets added for ableist language Any nuclear war causes extinction – ice age and famine.Steven Starr 15 ~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 worked with the Swiss, Chilean, and Swedish governments in support of their efforts at the United Nations to eliminate thousands of high-alert, launch-ready U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. "Nuclear War: An Unrecognized Mass Extinction Event Waiting To Happen." Ratical. March 2015. https://ratical.org/radiation/NuclearExtinction/StevenStarr022815.html~~ TG | 1/8/22 |
JanFeb - 1AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: The 47th Churchill Classic | Round: 5 | Opponent: McNeil YM | Judge: Dylan Jones FramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Epistemology – rational deliberation of educational concepts is necessary to interpret other arguments since it's a prerequisite to interpreting epistemological concepts and it's the terminal impact of debate as education is the only portable impact.~3~ Procedure – reason is a side constraint on debate since otherwise we can't refute – responding to this concedes the authority of reason since you're reasoning via logical deliberation.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a priori d) past experiences have no effect on causality or internal link to continuity, i.e. raining yesterday doesn't mean rain today.Duty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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~ Weighing practices is incoherent because it relies on an assessment of ends, which relies on a further assessment. A practice that negates is not contradictory to a practice that affirms, and thus proving my end affirms is sufficient. So, proving the converse of the resolution is not sufficient to disprove the resolution's truth.~3~ 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.~4~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine 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 Private entities are non-governmental.Dunk 11 – Frans G. von der Dunk, 2011, ~"The Origins of Authorisation: Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty and International Space Law," University of Nebraska~ Justin Exemptions destroy the coercive power of legal regimes – causes circumvention across the board.Hickman and Dolman 2 – John and Everett, 2002, Associate professor in the Department of Government and International Studies at Berry College in Mt. Berry, ~"Resurrecting the Space Age: A State–Centered Commentary on the Outer Space Regime," Volume 21 Number 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/014959302317350855~~ Elmer Recut Justin 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 ~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 ~2~ Extending neoliberal polices in space violate universal law through continued injustice.Segobaetso 18 Segobaetso, Benjamin. Ethical Implications of the Colonization, Privatization and Commercialization of Outer Space. SJEP ~3~ The categorical imperative rejects states and companies desires to profit off of space for themselves.Wurth 19Wurth, Nicolas. "SPACE ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL SPACE LAW: ADVANCEMENT AND ENFORCEABILITY." University of Luxembourg , 2019. SJEP Underview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water is not morally right or wrong but if I had to justify my action every time I decided upon a course of action I would never be able to make decisions.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on somethingAdvantageThe 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 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 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 *Brackets added for ableist language Any nuclear war causes extinction – ice age and famine.Steven Starr 15 ~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 worked with the Swiss, Chilean, and Swedish governments in support of their efforts at the United Nations to eliminate thousands of high-alert, launch-ready U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. "Nuclear War: An Unrecognized Mass Extinction Event Waiting To Happen." Ratical. March 2015. https://ratical.org/radiation/NuclearExtinction/StevenStarr022815.html~~ TG | 1/9/22 |
MarApr - 1AC - KorsgaardTournament: TFA State | Round: 5 | Opponent: Plano East AW | Judge: Nelson Okunlola TFA R5 – 1AC v Plano East AWFramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Procedure – reason is a side constraint on debate since otherwise we can't refute – responding to this concedes the authority of reason since you're reasoning via logical deliberation.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a prioriDuty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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~ 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.~3~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine ~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. AdvocacyThus the advocacy: In a democracy, a free press ought to prioritize objectivity over advocacy.Objectivity means consistent and transparent methods of testing factual claims.Dean (Committee of Concerned Journalists training director and API Executive Director Tom Rosenstiel formerly co-chaired the committee). No Date, American Press Institute, The lost meaning of 'objectivity', https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/bias-objectivity/lost-meaning-objectivity/ Advocacy means to be biased for a specific viewpoint.Cambridge Dictionary No Date ~Cambridge Dictionary, No Date, "advocacy," https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/advocacy~~/Kankee AND Free press is a country'sCambridge Dictionary, ND, "free press," No Publication, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/free-press Offense~1~ Under the categorical imperative, objectivity must always be prioritized because anything else is a contradiction in conception of lying, if a lie were universalized then there would no longer be a conception of truth. This makes objectivity the highest layer that always comes first, even if you are advocating.~2~ Any claim that advocacy is constitutive to a free press is impermissible because the function of media is to report information—the constitutive purpose of the media is objective presentation of information because citizens have a right to be informed.Klein 20 ~Ian Klein, J.D. Candidate at the Texas AandM University School of Law, 2020, "Enemy of the People: The Ghost of the F.C.C. Fairness Doctrine in the Age of Alternative Facts." Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal, https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1809andcontext=hastings_comm_ent_law_journal~~/Kankee That affirms: if we all necessarily want our rights enforced and freedoms respected, we all necessarily agree to carry the responsibilities as well as the rights and privileges of citizenship to ensure the government can accurately act as a collective agentKorsgaard 18 ~The Claims of Animals and the Needs of Strangers: Two Cases of Imperfect Right. The Journal of Practical EthicsVolume 6, No. 1, June 2018. OPEN ACCESS. http://www.jpe.ox.ac.uk/papers/the-claims-of-animals-and-the-needs-of-strangers-two-cases-of-imperfect-right/~~ SJ AME ~3~ A condition of reason is to be able to formulate ideas and ends based on both your private and public use of reason. This can only happen through public information exchange that is not connected to personal or subjective ties.Donald 03 ~James Donald, February 3, 2003; KANT, THE PRESS, AND THE PUBLIC USE OF REASON JAMES DONALD James Donald is Professor of Film Studies at the University of New South Wales, email: J.Donald@curtin.edu.au. https://javnost-thepublic.org/article/pdf/2003/2/3/~~ ~4~ Advocacy is premised off of making somebody do something for you which violates the categorical imperative because you're using someone as a means to an end.Underview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs to check infinite 1NC abuse1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on something~3~ Seniors should get 30 speaks~a~ This is my last in-person tournament so it should be memorable AdvantageThe Populist PiS is in control of Poland. EU sanctions are effective, but the PiS continues to rebelMoskwa and Jefferson 20 Moskwa, Wojciech, and Rodney Jefferson. "Poland's Populist Turn." Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 31 Oct. 2020, https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/poland.//SJEP The PiS controlled Polish media is key to guarantee future elections and sway voters to the PiS.Kalan 19 Kalan, Dariusz. "Poland's State of the Media." Foreign Policy, 25 Nov. 2019, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/25/poland-public-television-law-and-justice-pis-mouthpiece/.//SJEP Biased polish media shifts public perception to the PiS and alters election outcomes.Gipson 21 Gipson, Abigail. "New Report: Poland's Public Media Serve as Propaganda Tool." International Press Institute, 17 Dec. 2021, https://ipi.media/new-report-polands-public-media-serve-as-propaganda-tool/.//SJEP Poland will never leave the EU, but PiS power ensures packed courts and decisions that deck legitimacy-that spills over and causes a massive crisisEconomist 21 Economist, Oct 21 2021, "Poland is a problem for the EU precisely because it will not leave," https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/10/14/poland-is-a-problem-for-the-eu-precisely-because-it-will-not-leave//SJJK And the EU is already weak and Poland is at the front of their issues-further legitimacy crisis destroys global democracy and emboldens further russian invasionsTisdall 21 Simon Tisdall Guardian, 11-21-2021, "Instability grips a weakened Europe as global predators smell blood," https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/21/instability-grips-a-weakened-europe-as-global-predators-smell-blood//SJJK And Russian invasions beyond Ukraine cause NATO draw in-they wont let Putin go beyond UkraineFinnis 3-3 Alex Finnis, 3-3-2022, "Whether Russia could attack other countries after Ukraine and if Nato members are under threat," inews.co.uk, https://inews.co.uk/news/world/will-russia-attack-other-countries-what-putin-after-ukraine-invasion-nato-members-threat-1495774//SJJK Ukraine wont go nuclear but if other countries get drawn in nuclear escalation is inevitableMajumdar 17 Dave Majumdar, 9-7-2017, "A War with Russia Would Go Nuclear. Here's Why.," National Interest, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/war-russia-would-go-nuclear-heres-why-22202//SJJK 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 | 3/11/22 |
SeptOct - 1AC - KorsgaardTournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: 2 | Opponent: Aragon ZA | Judge: Tej Gedela FramingEthics 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.~D~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible.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~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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 ~3~ Non-Ideal theory fails: ~a~ Ethical egoism, ~b~ Infinite ethical evaluations~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. ~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.AdvocacyPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics.Here's spec – 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 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 2~ 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 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 Underview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water is not morally right or wrong but if I had to justify my action every time I decided upon a course of action I would never be able to make decisions.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~1~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~2~ they get to go for their shell and beat back mine in the long 2NR but the 2AR is too short to do bothAdvantageOnly 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 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 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 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 Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don't assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs | 9/4/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - Korsgaard v2Tournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: 3 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Abhinav Sinha FramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Epistemology – rational deliberation of educational concepts is necessary to interpret other arguments since it's a prerequisite to interpreting epistemological concepts and it's the terminal impact of debate as education is the only portable impact.~3~ Procedure – reason is a side constraint on debate since otherwise we can't refute – responding to this concedes the authority of reason since you're reasoning via logical deliberation.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a priori d) past experiences have no effect on causality or internal link to continuity, i.e. raining yesterday doesn't mean rain today.Duty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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~ Weighing practices is incoherent because it relies on an assessment of ends, which relies on a further assessment. A practice that negates is not contradictory to a practice that affirms, and thus proving my end affirms is sufficient. So, proving the converse of the resolution is not sufficient to disprove the resolution's truth.~3~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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 ~4~ What the neg reads doesn't prove the resolution false but challenges an assumption of it. Statements which make assumptions like the resolution should be read as a tacit conditional which is an if p then q statement. For all conditionals, if the antecedent is false, then the conditional as a whole is true.AdvocacyPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics. CPs, Ks, and PICs affirm because they do not disprove my general thesis.Here's spec – 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 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 2~ 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 Underview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance which justifies evaluating the debate after the 1AR to alleviate time skew, ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on somethingNo new 2NR responses – it leads to infinite sandbagging and avoids clash since they have 6 minutes – also infinite abuse since the short 1AR is premised off 1NC concessions.~2~ Presumption and permissibility affirm –A~ We always default to assuming something true until proven false ie if I told you my name is Jarvis you would believe meB~ If agents have to justify why every action is morally good we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral i.e. drinking waterC~ Lack of offense means it's ok to do something, but it's never okay to do something which is prohibited which means that the neg has to win offense.~3~ The role of the ballot is to determine whether the resolution is a true or false statement – anything else moots 6 minutes of the AC and exacerbates the fact that they get a reactivity advantage since I should be able to compensate by choosing, which also applies to the standard.Resolved means firmly determined which I am so vote aff:~A~ Inclusion: a) other ROBs open the door for personal lives of debaters to factor into decisions and compare who is more oppressed which causes violence in a space where some people go to escape. b) Anything can function under truth testing insofar as it proves the resolution either true or false. Specific role of the ballots exclude all offense besides those that follow from their framework which shuts out people without the technical skill or resources to prep for it. Additionally, in order to prove the aff false, you must presume it is true and respond to that presumption, which concedes the authority of the aff's truth so you affirm. Our arguments affirm under any ROB – they have prove the statement my world is better is true.~B~ The ballot says vote aff or neg based on a topic – five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means it's constitutive and jurisdictional – controls the internal link to fairness since it's the basis of things like predictability and prep and jurisdiction is a meta constraint on anything else since the judge voting aff if they affirm better and neg the contrary proves that it's an independent voter and otherwise they could just hack against or for you which means hack against them if they contest it and it also controls the internal link to fairness since that's definitionally unfair.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 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 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 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 | 9/5/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - Korsgaard v3Tournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: 6 | Opponent: Ayala AM | Judge: Ishan Rereddy FramingEthics 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.~D~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible.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~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine ~3~ 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.~4~ 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.~5~ Reject endorsement of consequentalism: a~ it justifies atrocities since it justifies allowing us to harm some for the benefit of others – even if they spew some pain quantifiability argument that doesn't solve since there are still instances some get great benefit from others harm. b~ it can't justify intrinsic wrongness – We can't know whether our action was good until we've evaluated the states of affairs they've produced since it's based on the outcome of the action, i.e., if asked the question "is genocide okay?" a utilitarian would not be able to say yes because there are situations in which it would be morally obligatory to do so if it maximized pleasure. Probability doesn't solve because that just allows for moral error and freezes action while attempting to calculate the perfect decision. c~ Drop them for ethics based in preservation–it creates a survival-at-all-costs mentality that justifies violence and makes debate unsafe.Callahan 73 Daniel Callahan, Fellow at the Institute of Society and Ethics, 1973 The Tyranny of Survival, Pages 91-93) SJCPJG AdvocacyPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics.Here's spec – 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 Offense~1~ IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 (Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/) BHHS AK ~2~ IPP is inconsistent with free market principlesKinsella 11 (Stephan Kinsella, 5-25-2011, accessed on 8-23-2021, Foundation for Economic Education, "How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market | N. Stephan Kinsella", https://fee.org/articles/how-intellectual-property-hampers-the-free-market/) BHHS AK That affirms: Free market economies are the only ones that allow people to be free to pursue their own interests.Richman 12 ~Sheldon Richman, 8-5-2012, "The Free Market Doesn't Need Government Regulation," Reason, https://reason.com/2012/08/05/the-free-market-doesnt-need-government-r/~~ SJ AME ~3~ IPP is nonuniversalizable – universalizing the act of restricting the production of a certain medicine terminates in a contradiction because it entails that you restrict your own ability to produce the medicineUnderview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral ie drinking water is not morally right or wrong but if I had to justify my action every time I decided upon a course of action I would never be able to make decisions.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ they get to go for their shell and beat back mine in the long 2NR but the 2AR is too short to do bothAdvantageOnly 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 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 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 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 Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don't assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs | 9/6/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - Korsgaard v4Tournament: Loyola Invitational | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Bergen County AK | Judge: Michael Kurian, Aryan Jasani, Brett Cryan FramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Epistemology – rational deliberation of educational concepts is necessary to interpret other arguments since it's a prerequisite to interpreting epistemological concepts and it's the terminal impact of debate as education is the only portable impact.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a priori d) past experiences have no effect on causality or internal link to continuity, i.e. raining yesterday doesn't mean rain today.Duty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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.AdvocacyPlan text: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines during pandemics. CPs, Ks, and PICs affirm because they do not disprove my general thesis.Here's spec – 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 Offense~1~ 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 ~2~ IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 (Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/) BHHS AK ~3~ IPP is inconsistent with free market principlesKinsella 11 (Stephan Kinsella, 5-25-2011, accessed on 8-23-2021, Foundation for Economic Education, "How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market | N. Stephan Kinsella", https://fee.org/articles/how-intellectual-property-hampers-the-free-market/) BHHS AK That affirms: Free market economies are the only ones that allow people to be free to pursue their own interests.Richman 12 ~Sheldon Richman, 8-5-2012, "The Free Market Doesn't Need Government Regulation," Reason, https://reason.com/2012/08/05/the-free-market-doesnt-need-government-r/~~ SJ AME ~4~ IPP is nonuniversalizable – universalizing the act of restricting the production of a certain medicine terminates in a contradiction because it entails that you restrict your own ability to produce the medicineUnderview~1~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ the 2NR has 6 minutes to win a shell and beat back mine, while the 2AR has 3 minutes and must heg their bets on somethingAdvantageAmerican 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 It's not over – Latin America is still skeptical of Chinese aid but lack of US presence means it's the only choice – try or die to capitalize on this weakness.Kneip 8/10 ~Lucie; Student at the University of Notre Dame studying Political Science and Global Affairs. Her research interests include U.S. foreign policy and democratization, civil and criminal warfare, and the intersection of religion and politics; "China's Vaccine Diplomacy in Latin America," The Diplomat; 8/10/21; https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/chinas-vaccine-diplomacy-in-latin-america/~~ Justin 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 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 Scientific consensus flows aff – nuke war leads to extinction and is the most probable impact scenarioTegmark 17 Max Tegmark, 5-26-2017, "Why 3,000 Scientists Think Nuclear Arsenals Make Us Less Safe," Scientific American Blog Network, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-3-000-scientists-think-nuclear-arsenals-make-us-less-safe/, SJBE Max Erik Tegmark is a Swedish-American physicist and cosmologist. He is a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the scientific director of the Foundational Questions Institute. 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 | 9/6/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - Korsgaard v5Tournament: Greenhill Fall Classic | Round: 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Matt Moorhead FramingEthics 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.~D~ Action theory – only evaluating action through reason solves since reason is key to evaluate intent, otherwise we could infinitely divide actions. For example: If I was brewing tea, I could break up that one big action into multiple small actions. Only our intention, to brew tea unifies these actions if we were never able to unify action, we could never classify certain actions as moral or immoral since those actions would be infinitely divisible.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~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~ You can't aggregate consequences, happiness and sadness are immutable – ten headaches don't make a migraine ~3~ 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.AdvocacyPlan 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 Offense~1~ IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 (Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/) BHHS AK ~2~ IPP is inconsistent with free market principlesKinsella 11 (Stephan Kinsella, 5-25-2011, accessed on 8-23-2021, Foundation for Economic Education, "How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market | N. Stephan Kinsella", https://fee.org/articles/how-intellectual-property-hampers-the-free-market/) BHHS AK That affirms: Free market economies are the only ones that allow people to be free to pursue their own interests.Richman 12 ~Sheldon Richman, 8-5-2012, "The Free Market Doesn't Need Government Regulation," Reason, https://reason.com/2012/08/05/the-free-market-doesnt-need-government-r/~~ SJ AME ~3~ IPP is nonuniversalizable – universalizing the act of restricting the production of a certain medicine terminates in a contradiction because it entails that you restrict your own ability to produce the medicineUnderview~1~ Permissibility and presumption affirm: ~A~ Negating an obligation requires proving a prohibition – they prohibit the aff action. ~B~ If agents had to reflect on every action they take and justify why it was a good one we would never be able to take an action because we would have to justify actions that are morally neutral.~2~ Aff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ they get to go for their shell and beat back mine in the long 2NR but the 2AR is too short to do bothAdvantage 1: COVIDOnly 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 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 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 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 Studies show that vaccine distribution solve COVID. Reject any ev that don't assume vaccine nationalism.Compares two models of HARs and LARs Advantage 2: DiplomacyAmerican 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 It's not over – Latin America is still skeptical of Chinese aid but lack of US presence means it's the only choice – try or die to capitalize on this weakness.Kneip 8/10 ~Lucie; Student at the University of Notre Dame studying Political Science and Global Affairs. Her research interests include U.S. foreign policy and democratization, civil and criminal warfare, and the intersection of religion and politics; "China's Vaccine Diplomacy in Latin America," The Diplomat; 8/10/21; https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/chinas-vaccine-diplomacy-in-latin-america/~~ Justin 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 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 Scientific consensus flows aff – nuke war leads to extinction and is the most probable impact scenarioTegmark 17 Max Tegmark, 5-26-2017, "Why 3,000 Scientists Think Nuclear Arsenals Make Us Less Safe," Scientific American Blog Network, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-3-000-scientists-think-nuclear-arsenals-make-us-less-safe/, SJBE Max Erik Tegmark is a Swedish-American physicist and cosmologist. He is a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the scientific director of the Foundational Questions Institute. 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 | 9/19/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - Korsgaard v6Tournament: Greenhill Fall Classic | Round: Octas | Opponent: Southlake Carroll PK | Judge: Elijah Smith, Jack Quisenberry, Alex Dumas FramingPractical reason constrains everything:~1~ Postulation – reason is a prior question to evaluation of ethics since anything else collapses on itself as we can infinitely question our foundations otherwise but raising the question of reason proves itself valuable as it necessitates reason.~2~ Epistemology – rational deliberation of educational concepts is necessary to interpret other arguments since it's a prerequisite to interpreting epistemological concepts and it's the terminal impact of debate as education is the only portable impact.~3~ Procedure – reason is a side constraint on debate since otherwise we can't refute – responding to this concedes the authority of reason since you're reasoning via logical deliberation.Freedom follows:~1~ We could not hold agents responsible for their actions if we did not assume them to have the freedom to control their actions for themselves.~2~ Freedom implies our actions occur after practical deliberation if it were retrospective, then we could claim that any and all events that happened before we decided to do something were part of our free action which is incoherent.Moral law follows – it stems uniquely from reason and not from empiricism. That outweighs – a) if morality were based on things like desires then it would be imposed on us from the outside and we could not be said to be free b) anything else is non-binding and arbitrary since empiricism is always subject to change, i.e. my hair is brown is a true statement but it could be false in a week c) an evil demon could deceive us or we could be dreaming which proves the only viable metric to guide action begins a priori d) past experiences have no effect on causality or internal link to continuity, i.e. raining yesterday doesn't mean rain today.Duty of right is impossible in state of nature:~1~ Ethical disagreements are inevitable because individuals have different areas of self-interest and desire. Only a non-arbitrary shared authority that can resolve disputes of interpretation resolves this problem.~2~ Claims to freedom and property are solely to peer discretion since empirical features of compliance are temporal and nonbinding – only the unification of will solves.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative. Prefer additionally:~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~ 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 and 2) Probability assumes causation, we can't assume every act was actually the cause of tangible outcomes ~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~3~ 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 ~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. ~5~ Put away your generic Kant indicts – our framework is a rejection of the western foundations of Kantianism in favor of a radical reconstruction of inclusion of the racialized and marginalized struggle.Mills 18 Charles W. Mills. "Black Radical Kantianism." Res Philosophica, Vol. 95, No. 1, January 2018, pp. 1–33 https:// doi.org/ 10.11612/ resphil.1622 SJCPJG AdvocacyPlan 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 Offense~1~ IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 (Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/) BHHS AK ~2~ IPP is inconsistent with free market principlesKinsella 11 (Stephan Kinsella, 5-25-2011, accessed on 8-23-2021, Foundation for Economic Education, "How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market | N. Stephan Kinsella", https://fee.org/articles/how-intellectual-property-hampers-the-free-market/) BHHS AK That affirms: Free market economies are the only ones that allow people to be free to pursue their own interests.Richman 12 ~Sheldon Richman, 8-5-2012, "The Free Market Doesn't Need Government Regulation," Reason, https://reason.com/2012/08/05/the-free-market-doesnt-need-government-r/~~ SJ AME ~3~ IPP is nonuniversalizable – universalizing the act of restricting the production of a certain medicine terminates in a contradiction because it entails that you restrict your own ability to produce the medicineUnderviewAff gets 1AR theory and RVIs – otherwise the neg can be infinitely abusive and there's no way to check against this1AR theory is drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer of the round – ~A~ the 1ARs too short to be able to rectify abuse and adequately cover substance, ~B~ they get to go for their shell and beat back mine in the long 2NR but the 2AR is too short to do bothAdvantageAmerican 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 It's not over – Latin America is still skeptical of Chinese aid but lack of US presence means it's the only choice – try or die to capitalize on this weakness.Kneip 8/10 ~Lucie; Student at the University of Notre Dame studying Political Science and Global Affairs. Her research interests include U.S. foreign policy and democratization, civil and criminal warfare, and the intersection of religion and politics; "China's Vaccine Diplomacy in Latin America," The Diplomat; 8/10/21; https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/chinas-vaccine-diplomacy-in-latin-america/~~ Justin 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 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 Scientific consensus flows aff – nuke war leads to extinction and is the most probable impact scenarioTegmark 17 Max Tegmark, 5-26-2017, "Why 3,000 Scientists Think Nuclear Arsenals Make Us Less Safe," Scientific American Blog Network, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-3-000-scientists-think-nuclear-arsenals-make-us-less-safe/, SJBE Max Erik Tegmark is a Swedish-American physicist and cosmologist. He is a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the scientific director of the Foundational Questions Institute. 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 Mapping the supply lines of military policy is necessary – anything else is fundamentally indifferent to violenceBryant 12 ~9/15, Levi, professor of Philosophy at Collin College and Chair of the Critical Philosophy program at the New Centre for Research and Practice, "War Machines and Military Logistics: Some Cards on the Table," https://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/09/15/war-machines-and-military-logistics-some-cards-on-the-table/~~ | 9/20/21 |
SeptOct - 1AC - MouffeTournament: Greenhill Fall Classic | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harker DS | Judge: Tom Evnen | 9/21/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
3/12/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/18/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/19/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/20/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/21/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/4/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/5/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/6/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
9/6/21 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
3/10/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
3/11/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
3/11/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
3/11/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
3/12/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/8/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/8/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/9/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/15/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/15/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/15/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
| |
1/16/22 | jyxie22@mailstrakejesuitorg |
|