| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any | 2 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 4 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 5 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 6 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 7 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| Any | 1 | Any | Any |
|
| ||
| The Trentacular Invitational | Finals | Trents Enemies | Trents Friends |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
Jan Feb AC 2Tournament: Any | Round: 2 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any The standard is consistency with basic capability equality. Only this provides the true value of equality – not concerned with goods or happiness, but what people can do. Sen: A focus on capabilities allows the maintenance of intuitions about fundamental human rights without requiring people to fulfill them. It creates consensus among conceptions of the good. Nussbaum: Only it allows dialogue between the oppressed, philosophers, and policymakers on equal comprehensible terms. Glass The capabilities approach best captures the value of rights – rights are not valuable as abstract rules, but are only fulfilled when people have the ability to exercise them. For example, someone who cannot walk lacks the full value of the freedom of movement without extra resources. Nussbaum 2 Capabilities can be interpreted in different ways in different societies – that is the point of pluralism. Nussbaum 3 No agent has greater epistemic access to moral truths because morals aren’t verifiable with empirical fact. Markovitz | 4/29/17 |
Jan Feb AC 3Tournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Thus, morality is a system of reasons we can all accept—mutual justifiability is the only way to solve the subjectivity of abstract moral theories. Contractual obligations are agent relative—reasonable rejection of principles can only come between two rational agents. This means we evaluate every moral consideration on a 1-1 ratio, not whether the aggregate of everyone following the principle would have a positive net effect. James: Thus the standard is consistency with the agent relative principle of reasonable rejection. Students cannot accept restrictions relative to the college because the basis of public universities and colleges is the constitution, which the protection of speech. Buchter: Metaethical actualism means no fiat for counteradvocacies. Jackson and Pargetter: And, contracts will always be made based on subjective emotions because that contributes to agent relative rejection. | 4/29/17 |
Jan Feb AC 4Tournament: Any | Round: 4 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Inclusion of all agents in the construction of truth is an ontological prerequisite to morality. Haste: No agent has greater epistemic access to moral truths because morals aren’t verifiable with empirical fact. Markovitz: Thus the standard is consistency with the maxim of including individuals in the construction of moral truths. Additionally, only the analysis of intent of an action includes all perceptions into the construction of truths. Tannenbaum: Speech codes entrench a massive divide within society and push society to manifest into one in which nobody is included in the manifestation of truth— historically proven. Haiman: And, even when speech codes do target those with oppressive ideology, they are coopted and used as a tool of exclusion. Cammaerts Further, the neg embraces an overall maxim in which individuals are excluded from moral projects- means only the affirmative has a risk of epistemic validity. Greenawalt: Restrictions establish conditions of which speech is acceptable which is exclusionary by virtue as it requires a declaration by one agent of which speech applies. ACLU: | 4/29/17 |
Jan Feb AC 5Tournament: Any | Round: 5 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Judgments based on external considerations are not moral judgments because they arise from considerations other than right and wrong. Bedke 2: Further, the very idea of externalist moral considerations assumes a background understanding that morality is internal. Bedke 3: Also, externalist moral conceptions collapse into desire rather than moral consideration. Roojen: Further, internal moral reasoning is idiosyncratic to individuals. This is true because moral reasoning cannot produce objectively verifiable outcomes for all moral reasoners. Coburn: And, objective or universalist conceptions of morality devolve to totalitarianism. Rawls: Thus, the criterion is consistency with internal moral standards. Externalist thought is embedded within the nature of restrictions in relation to speech acts. And, the affirmatives method of engagement with speech uniquely weeds out oppressive ideologies from prevalent ideas— prevents active imposition of moral values. Moosa: Moosa, T. (2012). John Stuart Mill And The Dangers Of Silencing. Big Think. Retrieved 19 February 2017, from http://bigthink.com/against-the-new-taboo/john-stuart-mill-and-the-dangers-of-silencing The neg actively excludes voices from moral projects- means only the affirmative has a risk of epistemic validity. Greenawalt: Restrictions establish conditions of which speech is acceptable which is externalist by virtue as it requires an externalist declaration of which speech applies. ACLU: Presume aff because there is an 11 side bias towards the neg | 4/29/17 |
Jan Feb AC 6Tournament: Any | Round: 6 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any Self-ownership if a commitment of all discursive exchange. Hoppe My framework is most specific to the topical state agent and the only one that explains the origins of legitimate state authority. Simmons The right to autonomous control of one’s aims and identity is foundational to other liberal rights, hence precludes and constrains rights like free speech. Christman The right to free speech is embedded within self ownership intrinsically- means the neg is by definition inconsistent with self ownership. Curtman: Self-ownership requires that agents have the ability to regulate access to the self- means one needs to be able to freely express oneself via free speech in the context of identity construction. Kupfer: And, the aff props up self ownership while simultaneously ensuring people do not become complacent in driving hate speech underground- restricting it via speech restrictions causes more backlash and drive racism underground-historically proven. Haiman | 4/29/17 |
Jan Feb AC 7Tournament: Any | Round: 7 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any "In 2002 scientists...the science experiments." | 4/29/17 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
4/29/17 | fenwayfan5@gmailcom |
|