Jump to content
tk.azerbaijan

population (malthus) DA

Recommended Posts

technology solves

 

poor timeframe - 1 to 10 ratio occurs over hundreds of years, gives time for reform/tech/whatever to solve.

 

n/u - beyond overstretch

 

birthrates declining

 

empirically denied - malthus was spouting this centuries ago, no crunch, only further population growth

 

...hopefully you have decent advantages or 2ac turns that lead to extinction or mass death so any 1 to 10 ratio is irrelevant. also remember that if they go for the DA they're conceding your entire impact scenario (have to if they want to access DA impacts), argue that 100% probability and much quicker timeframe plus your (significant?) magnitude outweighs hypothetical, postulated impact scenario that's never actually happened and has never been factored into decision making by any respected organization ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seriously....rights mathlus is incredibly easy to beat if you just thinks about what your doing and dont let the other team complicate the disad to the point that the judge buy's what they are saying. You dont need blocks.....type random answers on your laptop and im sure they will beat this shitty as disad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you know the person who asked the question, or did you just assume everyone has a laptop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whether i know the person or not doesnt matter.....i didnt mean for the statement to assume that everyone has a laptop....i simply expressed my technique for answering rights mathlus....which is typing up answers on my laptop..........meaning anyone else can type them on a computer at home, at the library, etc......or just hand write them, whatever method they find helpful or have access to. thats all.....sorry if i offended you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this the same thing as rights malthus?

 

no, this says that US civil liberties will cause people to move here and that increases fertility rates and we'll over populate and all die.

the links are really shitty and there are like 12 good impacts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whether you know the person does matter, since if you knew them you could have known if they had a laptop which would have made your statement not an assumption about the means which this other person has available or other people generally have available.

 

type random answers on your laptop

 

i simply expressed my technique for answering rights mathlus

 

it's pretty clear you weren't only expressing what you do, you were prescribing what someone else should do and as a part of that prescription you invovled an expensive piece of equipment. i'm gonna be upfront about this to contextualize where i'm coming from and just out of integrity - i own a laptop, and use it for debate. at the same time, i dont expect (or say things that imply exectations) that everyone in debate have a laptop (or multiple tubs, or assistant coaches, or the money to travel, or dress in new name brand shirts/ties). it's not that you offended me, its that i dont like seeing debate cast in a light that makes it look any more elitist than it already is not only so that i can feel better about debate but also so that other people (perhaps new people or people considering their future/continued participation in the activity, or people whom you exclude from the "average debater" image) don't feel like they dont belong or cant fit in/compete. what really gets me about that post in paritcular is that the reference to your laptop is wholly unneeded. you say after my question that you meant that people can just write blocks in whatever fashion they have access to, but this leads me to ask why your first post looked like this

 

type random answers on your laptop

 

and not like this

 

make random answers

 

or, since you're saying the person doesn't need blocks but rather just should make them up on the flow, you could use the verb "flow" in place of "make" as well.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whether you know the person does matter, since if you knew them you could have known if they had a laptop which would have made your statement not an assumption about the means which this other person has available or other people generally have available.

 

 

 

 

 

it's pretty clear you weren't only expressing what you do, you were prescribing what someone else should do and as a part of that prescription you invovled an expensive piece of equipment. i'm gonna be upfront about this to contextualize where i'm coming from and just out of integrity - i own a laptop, and use it for debate. at the same time, i dont expect (or say things that imply exectations) that everyone in debate have a laptop (or multiple tubs, or assistant coaches, or the money to travel, or dress in new name brand shirts/ties). it's not that you offended me, its that i dont like seeing debate cast in a light that makes it look any more elitist than it already is not only so that i can feel better about debate but also so that other people (perhaps new people or people considering their future/continued participation in the activity, or people whom you exclude from the "average debater" image) don't feel like they dont belong or cant fit in/compete. what really gets me about that post in paritcular is that the reference to your laptop is wholly unneeded. you say after my question that you meant that people can just write blocks in whatever fashion they have access to, but this leads me to ask why your first post looked like this

 

 

 

and not like this

 

 

 

or, since you're saying the person doesn't need blocks but rather just should make them up on the flow, you could use the verb "flow" in place of "make" as well.

 

if he had've said, "write answers on your paper," you wouldn't of been like, "that sets standards that people who aren't poor shouldn't be able to use a laptop."

you're not frustrated that he's making debate look "elistist," that's a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if he had've said, "write answers on your paper," you wouldn't of been like, "that sets standards that people who aren't poor shouldn't be able to use a laptop."

you're not frustrated that he's making debate look "elistist," that's a lie.

 

you're right. i just stand adamently opposed to the technology i use in the forum i use it in

i own a laptop, and use it for debate
...next time you're going to make baseless accusations about something you cannot prossibly know, verify, or evidence at least read the entire post before you do so don't end up looking like an ass. furthermore, you're argument fails at logic. if that's not the motive for my post, what is?

 

 

"write your answers on paper" doesn't establish a norm that would exclude anyone from debate as an activity. "type your answers on your laptop" implies that all debators have laptops, so people who cannot afford laptops are marginalized. clearly the inverse is not true since people who can afford laptops can also afford paper. ass. consider the following parallel story. we are in a club together, you are rather poor and i am rich. when discussing the best option to get to the next club meeting i advise the clubmembers as a group "take your private jet". this unfairly assumes we all own private jets, and in a club where most of the members are rich and increasingly own private jets this risks setting a normative image of the "standard" club member as owning a private jet which would have obvious implications for recruiting lower income club member. the inverse suggestion at the club meeting "we should take a cab" does not reverse the stigma because people who can afford the jet 1. can also afford a cab and 2. will likely take the jet anyway since they can afford the luxurious and more convenient alternative.

 

this is such a silly quibble
yeah, fucking economic oppression. who cares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you're right. i just stand adamently opposed to the technology i use in the forum i use it in...next time you're going to make baseless accusations about something you cannot prossibly know, verify, or evidence at least read the entire post before you do so don't end up looking like an ass. furthermore, you're argument fails at logic. if that's not the motive for my post, what is?

 

 

"write your answers on paper" doesn't establish a norm that would exclude anyone from debate as an activity. "type your answers on your laptop" implies that all debators have laptops, so people who cannot afford laptops are marginalized. clearly the inverse is not true since people who can afford laptops can also afford paper. ass. consider the following parallel story. we are in a club together, you are rather poor and i am rich. when discussing the best option to get to the next club meeting i advise the clubmembers as a group "take your private jet". this unfairly assumes we all own private jets, and in a club where most of the members are rich and increasingly own private jets this risks setting a normative image of the "standard" club member as owning a private jet which would have obvious implications for recruiting lower income club member. the inverse suggestion at the club meeting "we should take a cab" does not reverse the stigma because people who can afford the jet 1. can also afford a cab and 2. will likely take the jet anyway since they can afford the luxurious and more convenient alternative.

 

yeah, fucking economic oppression. who cares.

 

 

*debaters

* adamantly

 

It didn't "fail at logic." that wasn't even funny. It was logical; I don’t know what your motive was, I based my argument on the logic of debater-nature. My guess was you were motivated to post what you did because you have your panties in a knot. You don’t care what was implied, you just want to argue about something. That's just my logical guess. I could be wrong.

 

Don’t call me an ass. Ass.

 

You’re very wrong. “Write answers on paper,” would imply that even in a debate round where all present have laptops they should all have paper too. You have to cut down trees to make paper. Clearly, all trees that can’t stop their being cut down are marginalized. There is a norm set by that statement.

 

So what club is it that we are in? Just out of curiosity. You know.

 

If I follow what you say about the norm set by “write blocks on your laptop,” then the statement “take your private jet” implies “take your private jet or you will not be let in to the next club meeting.” The inverse suggestion to “take your private jet” (i.e. take your private jet or you will not be allowed in) would be “take the bus” (i.e. take the bus or you will not be let in) because laptops (private jets) cost a lot and paper (the bus) costs very little, where something between laptops and paper (cabs) is still moderately expensive. If you were you to then say “take the bus” (i.e. take the bus or you will not be let in) then people who have enough money and can buy jets wouldn’t be able to use them. That was actually contradictory on your part. If the statement, "write blocks on your laptop," sets a laptop standard, then the statement, "write blocks on your paper," has to set standards too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop talking why are you guys wasting so much time on Malthus when it can be put to so much better use. I mean when have you actually seen this argument, once. And I bet that was in a joke round. So now that we have all had a good laugh let this bull shit argument DIE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all you dismissing malthus as "crazy" without warranting anything are pretty lame. since malthus arguments haven't won any big rounds in the past few years..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stop talking why are you guys wasting so much time on Malthus when it can be put to so much better use. I mean when have you actually seen this argument, once. And I bet that was in a joke round. So now that we have all had a good laugh let this bull shit argument DIE

oh god, i've just wasted 6+ minutes of my life talking about this.

SHIT SHIT

I'VE GOT TO GET THEM BACK!

OH GOD NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*debaters

* adamantly

 

It didn't "fail at logic." that wasn't even funny. It was logical; I don’t know what your motive was, I based my argument on the logic of debater-nature. My guess was you were motivated to post what you did because you have your panties in a knot. You don’t care what was implied, you just want to argue about something. That's just my logical guess. I could be wrong.

 

it wasn't supposed to be funny, it's a sad reflection on the reality of your abillity to formulate ideas. if you cannot identify that it is more logical that i have a vested interest/belief in the issue than that i just want to argue about something then i have a bad feeling that this part of this issue will be incommensureable. "your guess" is based on something you cannot prove or verify or evidence and since it's my disposition that we are arguing about that means the only evidence would be what i say about it and the content of my posts, both of which resolve this issue in my favor. it doesn't really matter, it's not particularly relevant anyway.

 

You’re very wrong. “Write answers on paper,” would imply that even in a debate round where all present have laptops they should all have paper too. You have to cut down trees to make paper. Clearly, all trees that can’t stop their being cut down are marginalized. There is a norm set by that statement.

 

well, somehow i feel that marginalizing every debator who cannot afford a laptop is worse than marginalizing trees. in order for this arugment ot matter, you must prove trees are of equal moral value to humans. have fun. also, i already said once and tried to illustrate with my example that the thesis of everything you say for the rest of this post is not true. IE you're trying to get across that "write your answers on paper" excludes rich people with laptops. this doesnt stand up to reason since those rich people can afford paper and therefore are still able to be a part of the "normal" debator image (whereas the inverse is not true, if i cannot afford a laptop, i am absolutely excluded from that image). finally, the environmental impacts to debate aren't exclusive to people who flow on paper. you have to drive/fly to tournys, it took manufacturing to produce your laptop (which wont biodegrade and cannot be recycled) and even the laptop debators carry evidence, printed on paper. this is clearly a red herring argument.

 

 

If I follow what you say about the norm set by “write blocks on your laptop,” then the statement “take your private jet” implies “take your private jet or you will not be let in to the next club meeting.” The inverse suggestion to “take your private jet” (i.e. take your private jet or you will not be allowed in) would be “take the bus” (i.e. take the bus or you will not be let in) because laptops (private jets) cost a lot and paper (the bus) costs very little, where something between laptops and paper (cabs) is still moderately expensive.

 

you're characterizing what is implied incorrectly. noone would think "take your plane or you wont be let in" in the same wway nooone would think "flow on your laptop or you wont be allowed to debate". they would think the state implies "we expect that people in our club have a private jet" or "we expect that debators have laptops" or "this is the usual way things are done" which sets an obvious class expectation for the group, marginalizing and disenfranchising those who cannot meet that expectation. the distinction between the bus and the cab isn't really all that important to my point. it's just supposed to represent something much more affordable than a private jet (the way paper is much more affordable than a laptop)

 

if you were you to then say “take the bus” (i.e. take the bus or you will not be let in) then people who have enough money and can buy jets wouldn’t be able to use them. That was actually contradictory on your part. If the statement, "write blocks on your laptop," sets a laptop standard, then the statement, "write blocks on your paper," has to set standards too.

 

the first sentence is just not true. there's no reason they couldn't use their jets just because it was expected that they use a bus. it may be a bit arrogant and highlight the fact that they have more money than most in the group but there's no reason they couldn't do it (largely because the implication to "you should take the bus" is not "you wont be let in unless you take the bus" the same way "write your blocks" doesnt imply "use paper or you cant debate anymore" it only implies "most of us use paper" which is far less exclusionary than saying "most of us use laptops" because, again, people who can afford laptops are not excluded frrom using paper but if you cant afford a laptop you are exlcuded from "most of us use laptops")

 

there's nothing contradictory about my position, i'm not saying setting implicit standards for debate is always bad - it's sort of innevitable. i'm saying, lets try to make those standards as inclusive as possible by not assuming the most expensive means for the activity. you're right "write your blocks on paper" does set a standard, and that standard is one that everyone can meet. some have chosen not to, but that's a choice they have made and are free to make. my problem is that "type your blocks on a laptop" doesn't allow poor debators to make a choice to not meet the standard, they are just excluded from it by means beyond their control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow....seriously....drop it......i am the person who began this by making the statement "use a laptop".....i apolagized for that....let it go! I didnt mean to marginalize anyone who didnt have a laptop....but to be honest....i think what others were trying to point out is that before critiquing other's choice of words and symantics....take a long look at your own. If i would have made the statement "use paper" i would have excluded environmentalists who wish to use laptops in hopes of avoiding the excessive use of paper! If i would have said "dang man....use a laptop" you could argue that i would be excluding women....assuming that everyone of value in debate is a man....i mean come on....there are so many scenerios that would have marganized some group of people.....but the fact of hte matter is that i apolagized and explained my broad statement......it was not ment to make those w/o access to a laptop feel inferior and LEAVE DEBATE.....i mean it was a mistaken choice of words that in no way represented the way i feel about the debate community!

Also....one more thing before i hope this quibble is dropped......Dont go off assuming that because i made that statement adn i own a laptop that i have all the privelages offered in the debate community. My partner adn i travel independently with no teamates adn no coaches....half the time we have no parents. We have to sit in break rounds and watch other teams prepped out by 6 different college debaters judging for their squad....as well as coaches and assistent coaches and teamates up the ass while we sit their and depend only on eachother and the resources we have built for ourselves! At the end of the day do i ask for pitty...no i dont...because we all make our way through the debate community in our own ways, utilising the resources that w e have! And i know alot of people in the debate community who happen to be less fortunate financially....who work their asses off to get laptops....so please dont assume that because someone has one....it makes them rich. Your only categorizing individuals. All in all....and to end this argument....im sorry....lets all move on with our lives and get back to RIGHTS MATHLUS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...