Enloe Gedela Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 1 | All | All |
|
| ||
| NSD | 1 | All | All |
|
| ||
| NSD | 2 | All | All |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Contact InfoTournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All | 5/2/17 |
1AC - KorsgaardTournament: NSD | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All Analytic We must have a reason for acting. All reason is inescapable and the inescapability of reason creates a moral obligation to act on the authority of reason, since it’s the only thing you absolutely must act on. Velleman 2. Yet the argument...can this be? Analytic Reasons have to be universalized so they aren’t contradictory i.e. equal reasons to drink water and not drink water put you in a state of paralysis so the only way to solve is to have universalized reasons. Velleman 3. This first-personal...law for all. Analytic Thus the standard is consistency with universal reason. Offense Animals experience and pursue pleasure through self-conception, making them rational beings, and rational creatures act on reasons, which gives them moral obligations to act on reason, (since reason is inescapable) making them moral agents. Therefore animals are moral agents. Korsgaard 1. Even if you...its point of view. Moral agents qualify as legal agents since: Humans and animals both rely on the Earth’s resources (the commons), and the commons is regulated by a series of legal rights therefore since the animals are already reliant on legal rights, they’re also entitled to legal rights. Korsgaard 2. Here is how...of original acquisition. There is no unique metaphysical reason that humans have any rights that that animals don’t. It’s only because humans got there first that humans have legal rights and animals don’t. Analytic. Korsgaard 3. Rationality or autonomy...rights after all Analytic. When humans deny rights to animals we’re also denying ourselves and our own animal nature. We are also animals, so when we legislate it must be on behalf of all animals, not just us. This links to Velleman 3 since contradictions are bad and denying animals rights also denies ourselves so we contradict ourselves. Uphold universality rights among all animals, human and not. Korsgaard 4. Because we are...the other animals and their rights. Underview
| 7/10/17 |
1AC - Logical ConsequenceTournament: NSD | Round: 2 | Opponent: All | Judge: All FW The role of the ballot is to vote for the debater who best proves the truth or falsity of the resolution. The aff must prove the rez true, and the neg must prove it false. The aff claiming some animals have some rights anywhere in the United States is sufficient to affirm. Prefer:
Second, the delineation ...than truth testing. Analytic 3. Analytic Here are some a prioris:
NEXT,
NEXT,
You could have...of these scenarios.” Analytic 4. Probability is the cornerstone of all education – that’s why we should use ought as probable– Griffiths: Thus, a sufficient burden for the aff is to prove the resolution either probable, or likely true. Webster defines Right-a moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way Offense Analytic
The Federal Bureau...for animal cruelty. NAVS (National Anti-Vivisection Society) ‘17 Preventing and punishing...animals are obtained. Analytic AND The Animal Welfare...regulations and rights. Underview
| 7/10/17 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|