-
Welcome!
Join our community for access to extra features including downloading files, posting in the forum, or even starting your own blog.
-
Announcements
-
- 10 comments
- 1839 views
-
- Added by David
-
-
Recent Topics
-
- 0 replies
- 54 views
-
- 4 replies
- 62 views
-
- 2 replies
- 121 views
-
- 2 replies
- 225 views
-
- 1 reply
- 123 views
-
- 2 replies
- 142 views
-
- 7 replies
- 204 views
-
- 6 replies
- 192 views
-
- 8 replies
- 296 views
-
- 4 replies
- 238 views
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Forum Statistics
54937
Total Topics824955
Total Posts
-
Recent Posts
-
By HyperRhizome · Posted
http://www.continentcontinent.cc/index.php/continent/article/viewArticle/91 is a much meme-d explanation of Baudrillard, plus it's accurate. Honestly, when I started out with baudrillard, I just read the intro to Simulacra and Simulation. It's pretty good. -
By HyperRhizome · Posted
Definitely what @seanarchy said. Also, you could probably argue that the judge should reject the argument and not the team. Rejecting the team leads to bad norm creation because teams are then practically excluded from debate even if they won the other flows. -
By HyperRhizome · Posted
It can be argued in terms that assuming that a plan will happen is bad for education, because, as you noted, things don't work like that in the real world. A debate should be focused on how we can learn the most and what we can best translate into real-world skills. If we continuously debate in the magical political vacuum of fiat, we hurt our ability to effectively learn real world skills. Plus, breadth over depth leads to better topic education and better-informed policies because affirmatives can then add planks and stuff for future rounds. I'm not saying that we shouldn't debate under the shutdown though, that's a pretty bad argument to make tbh. -
By PrideOfLenin · Posted
How does fiat bad theory make sense outside of a kritikal debate? Obviously the USFG isn't immediately going to do the plan just cause someone said they should in a high school debate round. The purpose of topic education is to become informed advocates for the future. The shutdown isn't going to last forever. A good affirmative won't spend too much time on this argument and the time skew will go in favor of the aff. -
By HyperRhizome · Posted
I mean, if the aff fiats the plan passing and also fiats funding, you could pretty easily read fiat bad theory. It doesn't take too long to read, and, even if you lose the theory flow, you could still argue that the aff should specify where funding comes from. Worst case scenario, you don't win that flow, but it'd still be a major time skew for the aff. So, unless they argue that its a time skew and that it's bad, reading it prolly still helps you.
-
-
Top Downloads
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
5.00 USD
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
Free
-
-
Recent Files
-
Free
-
Free
-
2.50 USD
-
Free
-
Free
-