| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,70 @@ |
|
1 |
+===Framework=== |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+ |
|
4 |
+====Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."==== |
|
5 |
+ |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+====Prefer this definition because:==== |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+====1. Predictability – Analytic==== |
|
11 |
+ |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+====2. Resolvability –==== |
|
14 |
+ |
|
15 |
+ |
|
16 |
+====a. There is no objective morality – if we debate over ethics or morality, there is no objective way to determine a winner.==== |
|
17 |
+**Hellier**, Coel. Professor of Astrophysics at Keele University in the UK. July 29, 2013. https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/six-reasons-why-objective-morality-is-nonsense/. |
|
18 |
+Lastly, and actually the strongest argument of all, no-one has ever |
|
19 |
+AND |
|
20 |
+Remove that subjective human opinion and the result is — literally — nonsensical. |
|
21 |
+ |
|
22 |
+ |
|
23 |
+====b. Analytic==== |
|
24 |
+ |
|
25 |
+ |
|
26 |
+====3. Real World Education – Normal citizens in the US have little to no influence on policies implemented by the government.==== |
|
27 |
+**Bullard**, Ben. Author at Personal Liberty. August 13, 2014. "The Average American Has 'Essentially Zero' Influence Over U.S. Policy," Personal Liberty. http://personalliberty.com/average-american-essentially-zero-influence-u-s-policy/. |
|
28 |
+An academic look into the driving forces behind American Federal policymaking concludes that the average |
|
29 |
+AND |
|
30 |
+virtually no voice in shaping Federal policy compared with the "economic elites." |
|
31 |
+ |
|
32 |
+ |
|
33 |
+====Analytic==== |
|
34 |
+ |
|
35 |
+ |
|
36 |
+====4. Side Burdens – Oxford Dictionary defines negate as to "deny the existence of." Thus, if I show that we shouldn't do the Aff, I am not sufficiently negating – the way that Neg wins the round is denying the existence of colleges not restricting any free speech occurring.==== |
|
37 |
+ |
|
38 |
+ |
|
39 |
+====5. Aff Ground –==== |
|
40 |
+ |
|
41 |
+ |
|
42 |
+====a. Topic Lit – Analytic==== |
|
43 |
+ |
|
44 |
+ |
|
45 |
+====b. Time Skew - Analytic==== |
|
46 |
+ |
|
47 |
+ |
|
48 |
+====6. Neg Ground –==== |
|
49 |
+ |
|
50 |
+ |
|
51 |
+====a. Topic Lit – Analytic==== |
|
52 |
+ |
|
53 |
+ |
|
54 |
+====b. Limits – Analytic==== |
|
55 |
+ |
|
56 |
+ |
|
57 |
+====Fairness is a voter – if I win that my ROTB is more fair than theirs, pref it because fairness is key to engagement – if they win their ROTB, that's only to be expected because they give themselves a huge advantage with it.==== |
|
58 |
+ |
|
59 |
+ |
|
60 |
+====Thus, the ROTB is to evaluate the probability of the Aff occurring in the real world. In the context of this round, that means you vote Neg if I show that no restriction of free speech on college campuses is improbable in the status quo.==== |
|
61 |
+ |
|
62 |
+ |
|
63 |
+===Contention=== |
|
64 |
+ |
|
65 |
+ |
|
66 |
+====Thus, I contend that colleges not restricting free speech is improbable in the status quo. Restrictions on free speech are prevalent in American colleges – especially in the last few years, they've been gaining popularity – means the trend is headed in the opposite direction.==== |
|
67 |
+**Burleigh**, Nina. American writer and journalist. May 26, 2016. "The Battle Against "Hate Speech" On College Campuses Give Rise To a Generation That Hates Speech." News Week. http://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/03/college- campus-free-speech-thought-police-463536.html. |
|
68 |
+More than half of America's colleges and universities now have restrictive speech codes. And |
|
69 |
+AND |
|
70 |
+verbal conduct" that potentially violates the civil rights of minorities and women. |