Fastflamingo 2ar
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Fastflamingo 2ar as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 870
- Pages: 5
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 1 of 5
First off is Framework (no, this isn’t the 1AR). He drops framework entirely. Therefore, evaluate real-world application, and if the res is true, you are obligated to vote Aff.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 2 of 5
Second is Competition is necessary for survival. Survival through raw competition. a) His only response is that competition kills. He’s not directly refuted the card showing how cooperation in the circumstance would do better. He tries to cross-apply a vague 1NC card, but even that doesn’t show how cooperation would do better. b) Cross-apply my next card: Cooperation comes through competition. a) He claims there’s no link between competition for power and survival. Well, cross-apply my previous card – animals survive by competing with one another. Remember: he hasn’t directly refuted that statement, only brought up a vague countering-phrase. Competition is necessary to play the game. a) His response is that competition is bad because those who lack skills, etc. become poor. And the poor have higher death rates. But look back at my first card – survival is through competition. b) Then, my second card – even if we cooperate to compete, we compete to cooperate. c) The next logical step is this card – we need competition in order to survive. Even if we HAD cooperation, like my opponents keeps saying we need, that would be achieved through competition. Societal follows competition. a) All he’s questioned is the warrant in the card. My response: i] Society that allows for “competition in harmony with nature and in interest of general welfare and progress” is, well, competition. ii] Without competition, we have unrest – consider China. Tiananmen Square? Chinese citizens protesting a lack of economic freedom, brutally put down by government troops. b) Society revolves around the level of competition we have. As competition increases, we have increase wealth and prosperity. Emprics of the recession in the 80s that we quickly got out of by utilizing competition. Society balls.
a) he agrees with this statement. b) summin’ it up: survival hinges upon competition. Even cooperation hinges upon competition.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 3 of 5
Third is Competition in Debate 1. Debate hinges upon competition. Debate exists because of competition. If we didn’t compete by giving speeches, there would be nothing. At. All. Nothing. All we would do is talk about things. Debate would no longer exist as we know it. 2. Cooperation plays a minimal role in debate. He doesn’t address anything I said here. The only things we’re cooperating with are things that are outside of our control; speech and skirt length, etc. Like I said in the 1AR, everything else is up for grabs – I could run a plan if I felt insane. Again: he dropped this. His only response is that ‘we have to agree on general rules of behavior and morality’. That fits with my contention. 3. Summation a) When you look at whether or not competition or cooperation are more important in debate, remember that phrase: in debate. Speech and skirt length aren’t in debate – they are outside. Remember my previous analysis: everything other than the above is up for grabs. b) Look at all the competing he’s using! He clearly supports competition as a means of achieving excellence. I’ve further broken down this analysis: i] If he is competing, you should vote Aff. By doing so, he would prove the resolution in its entirety; by attempting to win by using competition he’s legitimized my interpretation straight out from the AC. ii] If he is not competing, you should vote Aff. By not competing, he would present you with no reason to prefer cooperation over competition. Cross-apply my previous analysis: the debate couldn’t even EXIST.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 4 of 5
Fourth is Negative Value. 1. His definition is new – restarts the discussion from the NR and skews the debate. Reject it. 2. NC: "Thus, the general welfare provides us with the maximum value in our hierarchy." Trying to maximize value like that is utilitarian. 3. “General welfare” rhetoric is Utilitarian – take it from someone who knows. Kemerling 02 Garth Kemerling [American philosopher. Has taught a variety of undergraduate courses in philosophy and written about ethical development and the practice of teaching philosophy. Has taught philosophy courses for 25 years], "Utilitarianism", ©1999-2002 Garth Kemerling, February 21, 2002, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5q.htm A generation later, utilitarianism found its most effective exponent in John Stuart Mill. Raised by his father, the philosopher James Mill, on strictly Benthamite principles, Mill devoted his life to the defence and promotion of the general welfare. With the help his long-time companion Harriet Taylor, Mill became a powerful champion of lofty moral and social ideals. 4. I advocate competition and morality that is not out to maximize value. The end result of competition is a maximization of value, but I don’t justify unchecked violations of human rights along the way. His turn fails. 5. The rest of the impact is dropped – accesses Armstrong 03. Human Rights trump all.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Final Focus A neg that affirms the resolution and has an immoral value, or …aff?
Page 5 of 5
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 1 of 5
First off is Framework (no, this isn’t the 1AR). He drops framework entirely. Therefore, evaluate real-world application, and if the res is true, you are obligated to vote Aff.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 2 of 5
Second is Competition is necessary for survival. Survival through raw competition. a) His only response is that competition kills. He’s not directly refuted the card showing how cooperation in the circumstance would do better. He tries to cross-apply a vague 1NC card, but even that doesn’t show how cooperation would do better. b) Cross-apply my next card: Cooperation comes through competition. a) He claims there’s no link between competition for power and survival. Well, cross-apply my previous card – animals survive by competing with one another. Remember: he hasn’t directly refuted that statement, only brought up a vague countering-phrase. Competition is necessary to play the game. a) His response is that competition is bad because those who lack skills, etc. become poor. And the poor have higher death rates. But look back at my first card – survival is through competition. b) Then, my second card – even if we cooperate to compete, we compete to cooperate. c) The next logical step is this card – we need competition in order to survive. Even if we HAD cooperation, like my opponents keeps saying we need, that would be achieved through competition. Societal follows competition. a) All he’s questioned is the warrant in the card. My response: i] Society that allows for “competition in harmony with nature and in interest of general welfare and progress” is, well, competition. ii] Without competition, we have unrest – consider China. Tiananmen Square? Chinese citizens protesting a lack of economic freedom, brutally put down by government troops. b) Society revolves around the level of competition we have. As competition increases, we have increase wealth and prosperity. Emprics of the recession in the 80s that we quickly got out of by utilizing competition. Society balls.
a) he agrees with this statement. b) summin’ it up: survival hinges upon competition. Even cooperation hinges upon competition.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 3 of 5
Third is Competition in Debate 1. Debate hinges upon competition. Debate exists because of competition. If we didn’t compete by giving speeches, there would be nothing. At. All. Nothing. All we would do is talk about things. Debate would no longer exist as we know it. 2. Cooperation plays a minimal role in debate. He doesn’t address anything I said here. The only things we’re cooperating with are things that are outside of our control; speech and skirt length, etc. Like I said in the 1AR, everything else is up for grabs – I could run a plan if I felt insane. Again: he dropped this. His only response is that ‘we have to agree on general rules of behavior and morality’. That fits with my contention. 3. Summation a) When you look at whether or not competition or cooperation are more important in debate, remember that phrase: in debate. Speech and skirt length aren’t in debate – they are outside. Remember my previous analysis: everything other than the above is up for grabs. b) Look at all the competing he’s using! He clearly supports competition as a means of achieving excellence. I’ve further broken down this analysis: i] If he is competing, you should vote Aff. By doing so, he would prove the resolution in its entirety; by attempting to win by using competition he’s legitimized my interpretation straight out from the AC. ii] If he is not competing, you should vote Aff. By not competing, he would present you with no reason to prefer cooperation over competition. Cross-apply my previous analysis: the debate couldn’t even EXIST.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Page 4 of 5
Fourth is Negative Value. 1. His definition is new – restarts the discussion from the NR and skews the debate. Reject it. 2. NC: "Thus, the general welfare provides us with the maximum value in our hierarchy." Trying to maximize value like that is utilitarian. 3. “General welfare” rhetoric is Utilitarian – take it from someone who knows. Kemerling 02 Garth Kemerling [American philosopher. Has taught a variety of undergraduate courses in philosophy and written about ethical development and the practice of teaching philosophy. Has taught philosophy courses for 25 years], "Utilitarianism", ©1999-2002 Garth Kemerling, February 21, 2002, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5q.htm A generation later, utilitarianism found its most effective exponent in John Stuart Mill. Raised by his father, the philosopher James Mill, on strictly Benthamite principles, Mill devoted his life to the defence and promotion of the general welfare. With the help his long-time companion Harriet Taylor, Mill became a powerful champion of lofty moral and social ideals. 4. I advocate competition and morality that is not out to maximize value. The end result of competition is a maximization of value, but I don’t justify unchecked violations of human rights along the way. His turn fails. 5. The rest of the impact is dropped – accesses Armstrong 03. Human Rights trump all.
Will Malson
FastFlamingo 2AR
Final Focus A neg that affirms the resolution and has an immoral value, or …aff?
Page 5 of 5
