Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[16]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[18]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[16]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-12-19 05:42:18.377
	1	+2016-12-19 05:42:18.0

Caselist.CitesClass[18]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,145 @@
	1	+==Part 1 is ROTB.==
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+====The wording of this res means that we have to evaluate the truth of its statement.====
	5	+Freeley and Steinberg. Austin J. Freeley, Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law. David L. Steinberg, Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami. 1986. "Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making." Found on Google Books.
	6	+Debate propositions may deal with controversies of fact, value, or policy. We
	7	+AND
	8	+not to simply affirm the desirability or worth of future change.'"
	9	+
	10	+
	11	+====Prefer this on this res – not restricting speech isn't a policy, so debates are supposed to evaluate the res.====
	12	+
	13	+
	14	+====This is also consistent with the use of the word "ought" in the res.====
	15	+Robinson, Richard. Fellow in Philosophy, Oriel College of Oxford University. July, 1971. "Ought and Ought Not." Philosophy, Vol. 46, No. 177 (July 1971), pp. 193-202. Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3749920.
	16	+Many ought-sentences are not prescriptive~~,~~ at all, either prudentially or morally
	17	+AND
	18	+of a ~~passed by~~ law. They are expressing an ideal."
	19	+
	20	+
	21	+====AND this is consistent with LD rules and semantics – the res is a hypothesis that must be evaluated - the judge must evaluate the truth of the res, not the desirability of it against its alternatives.====
	22	+Zarefsky, David. American communication scholar with research specialties in rhetorical history and criticism; professor at Northwestern; 1968 NDT top speaker. 1976. "Argument as Hypothesis Testing," Paper presented at the Ann Speech Communication Association Francisco, California, December.
	23	+Finally, the hypothesis-testing model directs that the judge make a yes-
	24	+AND
	25	+central principles of the proposition and the universe of non-propositional alternatives.
	26	+
	27	+
	28	+====Thus, the ROTB is to evaluate the truth of the statement: "Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech." Thus, I defend the res as a general principle being true. But, if I need to defend a specific plan, I'll defend implementation of the res.====
	29	+
	30	+
	31	+==Part 2 is framework.==
	32	+
	33	+
	34	+====Morality begins with recognizing humans as beings with practical reason; without this, we're prevented from finding a starting point for deriving morality.====
	35	+Engstrom, Stephen. Professor of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh. 2008. "Universal Legislation As the Form of Practical Knowledge."
	36	+In addition to the idea of universal legislation as the form of practical cognition,
	37	+AND
	38	+persons, or subjects with wills, sharing the power of practical reason.
	39	+
	40	+
	41	+====Conceptions of self under practical reason give rise to obligations that define morality – there is no morality without the self.====
	42	+Korsgaard, Christine M. Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. November 17, 1992. "The Sources of Normativity," from The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Cambridge University.
	43	+It is the conceptions of ourselves that are most important to us that give rise
	44	+AND
	45	+said that it did: that our autonomy is the source of obligation.
	46	+
	47	+
	48	+====Thus, I value Respecting Individual Liberty.====
	49	+
	50	+
	51	+====Prefer this:====
	52	+
	53	+
	54	+====Epistemologically a priori to standards.====
	55	+Fried, Charles. Educated at Princeton, Oxford and Columbia Law School, Charles Fried, the Beneficial Professor of Law, has been teaching at Harvard Law School since 1961. September 2005. "The Nature and Importance of Liberty," http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No1_Fried.pdf.
	56	+I would say that what is important about us, what makes us moral human
	57	+AND
	58	+if the other person has not chosen voluntarily to enlist in that campaign.
	59	+
	60	+
	61	+====Respecting the liberty of individuals rejects arbitrary discrimination and promotes equality.====
	62	+Weil, Simone. French philosopher and political activist. Translated by Arthur Wills and John Petrie. Originally published in 1955; English version published in 1958. "Oppression and Liberty." http://www.mercaba.org/SANLUIS/Filosofia/autores/ContemporC3A1nea/Weil20(Simone)/Oppression20and20Liberty.pdf.
	63	+Man is not made to be the plaything of the blind collectivities that he forms
	64	+AND
	65	+man by man, nothing is so beautiful or so sweet as friendship.
	66	+
	67	+
	68	+====Morality must be intrinsically binding without contingent – this means agency comes first because it's inevitable.====
	69	+Ferrero, Luca. University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee. January 12, 2009. "Constitutivism and the Inescapability of Agency," Version 3.05. Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. IV.
	70	+The norms of rationality and morality have special authority; they are categorically binding.
	71	+AND
	72	+oughts of rationality and morality, we are bound by them sans phrase.
	73	+
	74	+
	75	+====Lib is a political philosophy as well – even if universities aren't moral agents, my framework says that institutions and governments with power over people should be as non-interventionist as possible. It's a double bind – either they are moral agents, in which case the syllogism applies to them, or they aren't, in which case they shouldn't intervene in the lives of those who are.====
	76	+
	77	+
	78	+====My framework is key to fairness –====
	79	+
	80	+
	81	+====Ground – This isn't some consequentialist framework where I'll shift my weighing args in the 2AR or virtue ethics framework where I'll change the importance of different virtues mid round. Both sides know exactly what their ground is – a priori to other fairness voters. This also controls the link to clash because it prevents Aff framework shift – clash is key to fairness because if we can't substantively engage against one another in the debate, there's no way to fairly judge the round by weighing arguments.====
	82	+
	83	+
	84	+====Resolvability – Same links as to ground – both sides and the judge know my framework and there's a definitive and objective way to determine the winner. 1) Key to truth testing ROTB because we need a way to objectively determine the truth of the res, and 2) key to fairness because if the judge can't decide on in-round substance it encourages judge intervention, which takes the question of the better debater away and invites a biased decision instead of a fair one.====
	85	+
	86	+
	87	+====Topic Lit – There's a lot of lit on libertarianism – unlike other philosophies, it's prevalent in both political and non-political philosophy. It's also common in debate, evidencing that it's key to Aff ground because it's grounded in topic lit. Key to fairness because without arguments based on the topic lit it makes a race to the bottom as debaters try to find the most obscure arguments not based on the topic lit.====
	88	+
	89	+
	90	+==Part 3 is freedom.==
	91	+
	92	+
	93	+====ALL free speech at colleges is objectively good under lib – here are a bunch of reasons –====
	94	+
	95	+
	96	+====A free society means people are free to express their opinions whenever, whatever to allow the spread of ideas – if ideas are bad or offensive, society will reject them.====
	97	+D'Amato, David S. Attorney and adjunct law professor whose writing has appeared at the Institute of Economic Affairs, the Future of Freedom Foundation, the Centre for Policy Studies, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Liberty Fund's Online Library of Law and Liberty, the Foundation for Economic Education, and in major newspapers around the world. D'Amato is on the Board of Policy Advisors for the Heartland Institute and he is the Benjamin Tucker Research Fellow at the Molinari Institute's Center for a Stateless Society. He earned a JD from New England School of Law and an LLM in Global Law and Technology from Suffolk University Law School. November 16, 2015. "The Most Liberal Value: Free Speech," Libertarianism.org. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/most-liberal-value-free-speech.
	98	+It is right, even virtuous, to hate and resist narrow-minded bigotry
	99	+AND
	100	+, must decide, as always, whether they favor freedom or force.
	101	+
	102	+
	103	+====Non-interference from authoritative agencies is especially applicable with free speech.====
	104	+Husain, Naseem. Contributor for Being Libertarian. September 24, 2016. "Why Free Speech Matters The Most," Being Libertarian. https://beinglibertarian.com/free-speech-matters/.
	105	+Of all of the rights that we are born with, the most sacred and
	106	+AND
	107	+especially if they seek to use the force of government to do so.
	108	+
	109	+
	110	+====Any restriction on free speech is a form of censorship that opposes freedom.====
	111	+Raof, Jonathon. Nova Southeastern University, Florida. December 14, 2009. "Libertarian Viewpoint on Freedom of Speech," Libertarian Viewpoint. http://libertarianviewpoint.com/blog/freedom-of-speech/.
	112	+In a critical response to Free Speech Zones, libertarians and others claim Free Speech
	113	+AND
	114	+ultimately undermines the freedom inherent in what the protection of free speech represents.
	115	+
	116	+
	117	+====Lib says people should have the right to offend others.====
	118	+Brennan, Jason. Robert J. and Elizabeth Flanagan Family Associate Professor of Strategy, Economics, Ethics, and Public Policy at the McDonough School of Business and Associate Professor of Philosophy at Georgetown University. 2012. "Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know," Accessed on Google Books (Pg. 82).
	119	+In a free society, everyone has the right to offend others. A society
	120	+AND
	121	+. No so. It makes each person's sense of indignation a weapon.
	122	+
	123	+
	124	+====Hearing opposing viewpoints is key to letting people go after their own life.====
	125	+Badamchi, Devrim Kabasakal. Professor @ Izmir University, Turkey. 2015. "Justifications of freedom of speech: Towards a double-grounded-non-consequentialist approach," Philosophy and Social Criticism. 2015, Vol. 41(9) 907–927.
	126	+Why is being justified in one's criticism significant for autonomy and free speech? I
	127	+AND
	128	+, which will be taken up later in this section of the article.
	129	+
	130	+
	131	+==Part 4 is underview.==
	132	+
	133	+
	134	+====Hold your structural violence frameworks - libertarianism rejects racism and oppression, too.====
	135	+McElroy, Wendy. Canadian individualist anarchist and individualist feminist. September 18, 2014. "Libertarianism and Racism," The Daily Bell. http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/wendy-mcelroy-libertarianism-and-racism/.
	136	+Libertarianism has been labeled "racist" by critics, including by some libertarians from
	137	+AND
	138	+. They can be realized only within a society based on private property."
	139	+
	140	+
	141	+====Universities and colleges are moral agents who are guided by morality – my syllogism also applies to them.====
	142	+Laurence, Ben. Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy and the College, University of Chicago. "An Anscombean Approach to Collective Action." http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/laurence/Anscombean_Collective_Action_Final.pdf.
	143	+But even if it is laying it on a bit thick to speak in this
	144	+AND
	145	+of its own, it can be the subject of a practical syllogism.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-12-19 05:42:19.943

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Jackson Lallas

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Harker SP

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+16

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Hollywood Stern Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JANFEB Lib AC

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+College Prep