Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[2]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[2]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[2]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-09-25 02:44:04.866
	1	+2016-09-25 02:44:04.0

Caselist.CitesClass[2]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,102 @@
	1	+Util Aff
	2	+Moral rules are derived from humans’ internal experiences, the most basic of which being that humans act in an interest of achieving the most happiness. Hazlitt writes:
	3	+“The Foundations of Morality,” 1964. The Foundation for Economic Education.
	4	+Henry Hazlitt, journalist who wrote for The Wall Street Journal, The Nation, The American Mercury, Newsweek, and The New York Times
	5	+
	6	+To repeat and to ... ought to follow.
	7	+
	8	+Since, we must look towards humans’ internal experiences to deduce what moral theory we should use, and when we look at the experiences of humans, we see that the most basic experiences that we can deduce are the goodness of pleasure and the badness of pain, we see that these are the moral rules we should follow. Sinhababu writes:
	9	+“The Epistemic Argument For Hedonism,” 2013, National University of Singapore.
	10	+Neil Sinhababu, Associate Professor, University of Singapore
	11	+
	12	+Phenomenal introspection, a ... of the process.
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+The purpose of debate is to prepare debaters for the real world by teaching advocacy skills. Mitchell writes:
	16	+“Pedagogical Possibilities for Argumentative Agency in Academic Debate,” 1998, Argumentation and Advocacy, 1998, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p41-60
	17	+Gordon R. Mitchell, Associate Professor, University of Pittsburgh
	18	+
	19	+As two prominent ... and advocacy skills.
	20	+
	21	+Because the goal of debate is to learn advocacy skills, utilitarianism is the best standard because it is used by policymakers. Goodin writes:
	22	+“Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy,” 1995. Cambridge University Press.
	23	+Robert Goodin, fellow in philosophy at Australian National Defense University
	24	+
	25	+My larger argument ... rules or conduct.
	26	+
	27	+Utilitarianism upholds equality better than any other ethical theory. Sen writes:
	28	+ “Equality of What?” 1992, Inequality Reexamined.
	29	+ Amartya Sen, Professor of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard University
	30	+
	31	+But what about ... all individuals' interests."
	32	+
	33	+Utilitarianism uses the principle stated in the card above of weighting all people equally to include impacts on future generations. Mulgan writes:
	34	+“Utilitarianism and our obligations to future people,” February 2014. The Cambridge Companion to Utilitarianism, pp. 325-347.
	35	+Tim Mulgan, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Auckland, and Professor of Moral and Political Philosophy at the University of St Andrews
	36	+
	37	+For the utilitarian ... our present interests.
	38	+
	39	+I defend the advocacy, “Countries ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power via a nuclear phaseout.” Ross defends my solvency:
	40	+“Avoiding Apocalypse: Congress Should Ban Nuclear Power.,” December 14, 2011. University at Buffalo.
	41	+Timothy J. Ross, UB Law
	42	+http://www.law.buffalo.edu/content/dam/law/restricted-assets/pdf/environmental/papers/ross12.pdf
	43	+
	44	+From the above ... abolishing nuclear power.
	45	+
	46	+Advantage one is reactor meltdowns.
	47	+
	48	+First is inherency. With just the current number of nuclear power plants, a nuclear accident is likely to occur once every 10 to 20 years. Lelieveld 12 writes:
	49	+“Probability of contamination from severe nuclear reactor accidents is higher than expected,” May 22, 2012. Max Planck Society.
	50	+Prof. Dr. Johannes Lelieveld, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz
	51	+https://www.mpg.de/5809418/reactor_accidents
	52	+
	53	+Catastrophic nuclear accidents ... nuclear power plants.
	54	+
	55	+Second is the link. By banning nuclear power production, the Aff prevents nuclear meltdowns, thus solving for this.
	56	+
	57	+Third is the internal link. Even a single nuclear meltdown would contaminate tens of millions of people. Lelieveld 12 writes:
	58	+If a single nuclear ... 21 million people.
	59	+
	60	+Fourth is the impact. Just by looking at Chernobyl, we can see the catastrophic impacts of a reactor meltdown. Grossman 10 writes:
	61	+“Chernobyl Death Toll: 985,000, Mostly from Cancer,” September 4, 2010. Global Research.
	62	+Prof. Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York College
	63	+http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-book-concludes-chernobyl-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908
	64	+
	65	+Considering health data ... same virtually forever.”
	66	+
	67	+Advantage two is nuclear terrorism.
	68	+
	69	+First is inherency. Terrorist groups, specifically Daesh, target nuclear power plants, and do so with the intent of causing massive damage. Sengupta 16 writes:
	70	+“ISIS nuclear attack in Europe is a real threat, say experts,” June 10, 2016. The Times of India.
	71	+Kim Sengupta, Defence and Diplomatic Editor at The Independent
	72	+http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/ISIS-nuclear-attack-in-Europe-is-a-real-threat-say-experts/articleshow/52685406.cms
	73	+
	74	+The threat of ... catastrophic consequences."
	75	+
	76	+Due to the lackluster security at nuclear plants, terrorists would be likely to succeed if they attacked a nuclear plant. Lyman 04 writes:
	77	+“Chernobyl on the Hudson? The Health and Economic Impacts of a Terrorist Attack at the Indian Point Nuclear Attack,” September, 2004, Riverkeeper.
	78	+Edwin S. Lyman, PhD, Union of Concerned Scientists
	79	+
	80	+Public concern about ... aviation security challenges.”
	81	+
	82	+Second is the link. Affirming shuts down all nuclear plants, thus making the risk of one of these attacks non existent. This is the only way to combat the threat of a potential attack on a nuclear plant.
	83	+
	84	+Third is the internal link. Nuclear terrorism leads to nuclear war between states. Ayson 10 writes:
	85	+“After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” 2010. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July.
	86	+Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington
	87	+
	88	+But these two … the so-called n+1 problem.
	89	+
	90	+Fourth is the impact. Nuclear war leads to extinction. Starr 14 writes:
	91	+“The Lethality of Nuclear Weapons: Nuclear War has No Winner,” May 30, 2014, Global Research.
	92	+Steven Starr, Director of Clinical Laboratory Science Program, University of Missouri-Columbia
	93	+http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-lethality-of-nuclear-weapons-nuclear-war-has-no-winner/5385611
	94	+
	95	+Nuclear war has ... animal forms of life.
	96	+
	97	+Last is weighing. Under utilitarianism, impacts that affect more people are weighed the most heavily. Bostrom writes:
	98	+“Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority,” 2012. Global Policy, Vol 4, Issue 1 (2013): 15-31
	99	+Nick Bostrom, Faculty of Philosophy and Oxford Martin School , University of Oxford
	100	+http://www.existential-risk.org/concept.html
	101	+
	102	+We might also ... entire human population.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-09-25 02:44:06.862

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Willie Johnson

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+x

ParentRound

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

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+6

Team

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

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Util Aff

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Greenhill