Lexington Roy Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Byram | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Byram | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Princeton | 1 | Scarsdale NI | Varun Bhave |
|
|
| |
| Princeton | 1 | Scarsdale NI | Varun Bhave |
|
|
| |
| Princeton | 4 | Xavier | Ben Ulene |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Princeton | 1 | Opponent: Scarsdale NI | Judge: Varun Bhave Has an apriori |
| Princeton | 1 | Opponent: Scarsdale NI | Judge: Varun Bhave Has an apriori |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
1 - Spikes KTournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Their obfuscation and the use of spikes is antiethical to the ethic of intellectual integrity, TORSON 13 Intellectual integrity is the biggest impact- it’s the point of debate. TORSON 13 Reject the 1AC’s use of spikes to embrace argumentative responsibility- you know what you did wrong and know you better own up to it. TORSON 13 | 2/17/17 |
1NC vs Xavier Roberts-GallTournament: Princeton | Round: 4 | Opponent: Xavier | Judge: Ben Ulene T – Consequentialism Interpretation- The affirmative must defend a consequentialist ethical theory. Violation: His aff says “generic util turns do not apply”
A. Turn Ground- If only intent/phil based offense links to the standard then no negative ground links to the aff because they can always say that consequences don’t matter. Abstract ideals are incontestable goods- literature reviews that implementation difficulties are the only arguments to debate about B. Stable Ground- the 1AR can defend material consequences or defend intentions/philosophical implications of their affs against Ks, they can also skirt out of generic turns and DAs which also inherently prove that they are bad. Ground key to fairness- ensures both debaters have equal access to args 2. Topic Literature Qualified immunity doesn't exist independent of empirical legislative decisions and police officer conduct- empirical actual focus is key TLR 4 2004 Texas Law Review "NOTE: The Paradox Of Qualified Immunity: How A Mechanical Application Of The Objective Legal Reasonableness Focused topic education outweighs A. Reading a framework and policy solves phil ground- our interpretation allows for negative frameworks to be read B. LD is a values debate isn’t responsive- 1. That commits the is-ought fallcy, just because it is a values debate, doesn't mean it ought to be, 2. That makes an empirical claim without an empirical warrant C. Timeframe- we have 2 months to discuss the topic- but we can always get phi led from other places D. Debate’s strategic incentives bastardize phil debate E. Phil debate creates unrealistic phil decisions F. Comparitive ethics debates are useless- in the real world people argue how actions apply under ethics G. philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against them, only util allows answers from both sides. D. Voter
No RVI
2. Chilling Effect- A. Race 2 Bottom- They deter negatives from reading theory against abusive affs- good debaters will just prep out shells. 3. Substance- Incentivizes borderline abuse to bait theory which kills substance, and if theory causes reciprocal skews to both sides we can still go back to substance but under their interp the round ends on theory No drop arg on T – cross-apply norms setting which outweighs since it’s a question of infinite abuse. Cap K Humans are grounded in material conditions that create all thought – trying to abstract from material reality (i.e, not defending consequentialist turns) is another link to the K. Eagleton 11 The affirmative’s legalistic approach to police violence brings us further away from recognizing the economic forces at work that makes police violence inevitable. Lane 7/21. Civil suits put an asking price on people’s suffering. Abel 81 Tort law commodifies suffering as loss of earning power – kills value to life. Abel 81 Commodification is the worst impact under Levinas – we treat the other as equivilant to currency, which denies its value and opens it to infinite violence. This turns the aff – police violence is a direct result of neoliberalism. A failure to recognize that makes violence inevitable. Lane 7/21 The alternative is an embrace of class-consciousness as a method of critiquing neoliberalism’s grip on policing. LaVenia 15 The role of the judge is to be a critical analyst testing whether the underlying assumptions of the AFF are valid. This is a question of the whether the AFF scholarship is good – not the passage of the plan. Neoliberalism sustains itself by operating by propagating a narrow lens of what it means to be ‘political.’ We situate the judge as a critical educator who steps back to evaluate the frames through which we view policy first. Reps prior. Blalock, 2015 On Case Kantian state of reciprocal constraint doesn’t exist in the US – all USFG action is unilateral coercion and must be rejected – the alternative is to reject the aff’s view of the USFG as an ethical mandate to reclaim black social agency and value black existence Kant Case Turns But even if a priori Kantianism comes first, I win anyway- Negate: A. Universalizing a restriction on police efficacy is self defeating because it extends and restricts state power which precludes the omnilateral will B. Making officers responsible for foreseen consequences violates their conditions of agency since we only identify with what we intend A desire to ignore the consequences of their advocacy causes failure --- you must evaluate consequences of their proposal Bracey 6 Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil. Issac 2 | 12/3/16 |
JF - Cap KTournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Eagleton 11 The affirmative’s legalistic approach to police violence brings us further away from recognizing the economic forces at work that makes police violence inevitable. Lane 7/21. Civil suits put an asking price on people’s suffering. Abel 81 Tort law commodifies suffering as loss of earning power – kills value to life. Abel 81 Commodification is the worst impact under Levinas – we treat the other as equivilant to currency, which denies its value and opens it to infinite violence. This turns the aff – police violence is a direct result of neoliberalism. A failure to recognize that makes violence inevitable. Lane 7/21 Lane outweighs the aff – we allow the other to be violently subjugated. Tort law and neolib’s commodification of life anonymizes suffering, which kills our ability to recognize the other. ZIZEK AND DALY 04 The alternative is an embrace of class-consciousness as a method of critiquing neoliberalism’s grip on policing. LaVenia 15 The role of the judge is to be a critical analyst testing whether the underlying assumptions of the AFF are valid. This is a question of the whether the AFF scholarship is good – not the passage of the plan. Neoliberalism sustains itself by operating by propagating a narrow lens of what it means to be ‘political.’ We situate the judge as a critical educator who steps back to evaluate the frames through which we view policy first. Reps prior. Blalock, 2015 | 2/17/17 |
ND - T ConsequentialismTournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Interpretation- The affirmative must defend act or rule util. Violation: His aff says “generic util turns do not apply”
A. Turn Ground- If only intent/phil based offense links to the standard then no negative ground links to the aff because they can always say that consequences don’t matter. Abstract ideals are incontestable goods- literature reviews that implementation difficulties are the only arguments to debate about B. Stable Ground- the 1AR can defend material consequences or defend intentions/philosophical implications of their affs against Ks, they can also skirt out of generic turns and DAs which also inherently prove that they are bad. Ground key to fairness- ensures both debaters have equal access to args 2. Topic Literature Qualified immunity doesn't exist independent of empirical legislative decisions and police officer conduct- empirical actual focus is key TLR 4 2004 Texas Law Review "NOTE: The Paradox Of Qualified Immunity: How A Mechanical Application Of The Objective Legal Reasonableness Focused topic education outweighs A. Reading a framework and policy solves phil ground- our interpretation allows for negative frameworks to be read B. LD is a values debate isn’t responsive- 1. That commits the is-ought fallcy, just because it is a values debate, doesn't mean it ought to be, 2. That makes an empirical claim without an empirical warrant C. Timeframe- we have 2 months to discuss the topic- but we can always get phi led from other places D. Debate’s strategic incentives bastardize phil debate E. Phil debate creates unrealistic phil decisions F. Comparitive ethics debates are useless- in the real world people argue how actions apply under ethics G. philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against them, only util allows answers from both sides. | 2/17/17 |
NP - Must SpecTournament: Byram | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any VIOLATION: Case specific violation Standards Topic Literature World Nuclear Association 16 Ground VOTER: | 10/14/16 |
SO - Warming DATournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Uniqueness Link Internal Link Impact Warming causes extinction | 2/17/17 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|