Jump to content
Deleuze

Free Unbroken Hauntology Aff (Huge Disclaimer inside)

Recommended Posts

Hey peeps, high school debate is done for good, but unlike the other awesome people on this website, I have slacked off all year long! I'm making this post in advance since I'll obviously edit it with other files. For now, here's an unbroken and extremely rushed Hauntology aff!

 

Disclaimer: I wrote this aff overnight right before state, never got a single K friendly judge on aff, so it remained unbroken. I realize it is poorly written and i deeply apologize. I didn't know how to cite the Johnson evidence so I used UNT's cite. I also lost my 2AC stuff and A2's plus clarification stuff, SORRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

 

Yes, I realize it's a weird VTL spin off, but remember life=death=life=death=life=death=life=death etc. So just think of VTL as VTD and vice versa. 

 

As James Stephenson once said about Hauntology, "It seems like a k of death". 

Hauntology Aff (Olmecs).docx

Edited by Deleuze
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The role of the ballot is to vote for the team that best presences spectrality. " What does that even mean?  And why are all your tags struck through?

 

Grammar note: "presence" is not a verb.  I think the word you're looking for is immanentize, but I'm not actually sure what you mean, so I could be wrong.

 

Top questions for CX:

1. Name 3 ways Olmec civilization actually 'haunts' the present, in any sense other than our lack of knowledge?

2. What exactly is the plan text saying we trade with? (Follow-ups likely)

3. How does case solve for fear of the unknown?

 

Other notes:

That Derrida 94 card is nonsense.  He conflates 'to live', the state of being, with learned behaviors, and uses that to conflate various senses of 'how to live?' as being the same question.  The biological question is quite distinct from the philosophical question, and the latter very well can be 'learned'.  (The former we can learn the answer to, even if we are biologically programmed to fulfill it - to eat, sleep, breathe, etc..., we just don't need to particularly learn the doing of a lot of it - breathing, for example, is controlled subconsciously by the hypothalmus iirc - even if we can learn the answer to the question).

 

Now, can we read and learn from people who are dead?  Sure - but not from their ghosts.  We can learn from what they wrote.  We can learn from stories told about them.  But all the learning is happening without any direct intervention of the dead.  If Derrida thinks there's anything revolutionary about 'people and events can cause things to happen after they die', he's been smoking something, and its probably stronger than pot.

 

"Vote aff to affirm the presencing of the Olmec, our challenging of the life-death binary rejects all risk based analysis in favor of guidance by our very own subconscious. Risk is nothing more than an authoritarian lackluster force that binds us to life while separating ourselves from the other." - more nonsense.  Our subconscious doesn't engage in risked based analysis?  How do you know?  Where does guidance by our own subconscious lead us?  How does this have anything to do with dead civilizations like the Olmec?

Gunder doesn't understand what risk actually is.  Risk isn't about lack of understanding, its about assessing uncertainty.  That uncertainty frequently doesn't come from a failure to understand, it comes from missing data whose relationship to the problem we do understand (and if we had that data it would improve our predictions but not our theoretical understanding), or oftentimes comes from uncertainty.  Nothing stops perfect awareness of the cause of our uncertainty.  (Consider physics, where error analysis can often measure our uncertainty precisely based on the known quality of our instruments - that's a perfectly understood uncertainty, and the risk is that we reach an incorrect conclusion because of that error - which is why we do error analysis to estimate that risk).  OTOH, true lack of understanding would make risk analysis impossible, because it would preclude a useful model in which to estimate risk in the first place.

 

Conflating 'undecidable and unknown' (which is not what all risk analysis is about, but whatever) with 'lack of understanding' is a severe error in thought that destroys his warrants.
 

The Baudrillard '2 card is both nonsense and evil.  (Also totally without any sort of warrants).  As to a first refutation, seeking to not die is not the same thing as being denied death.

 

The Baudrillard '76 card is also terrible.  First, racist use of the word 'Indian' to mean native american. Second, the idea that racism is a modern phenomenon basically ignores several thousand years of recorded history.  He's explicitly whitewashing the racism of Spanish and Portugese colonialism in South America, which is pretty offensive.

 

"prefer our framework as spectral influence is not objective."

Also, not measurable, at all.  One would be tempted to say 'necessarily zero'.

 

 

Negative Strategy will be a Hobbes DA linking to 'guidance by subconscious', and a K of anti-empiricism with a CP Alt of 'explain the unknown by scientific investigation' with an education plank, which also solves for any fear better.   Counter-RoB will be whomever reduces unexplained phenomena the best, and thus solves the most fear, as per the tag to their Mical evidence.

  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The role of the ballot is to vote for the team that best presences spectrality. " What does that even mean?  And why are all your tags struck through?

 

Grammar note: "presence" is not a verb.  I think the word you're looking for is immanentize, but I'm not actually sure what you mean, so I could be wrong.

 

Top questions for CX:

1. Name 3 ways Olmec civilization actually 'haunts' the present, in any sense other than our lack of knowledge?

2. What exactly is the plan text saying we trade with? (Follow-ups likely)

3. How does case solve for fear of the unknown?

 

Other notes:

That Derrida 94 card is nonsense.  He conflates 'to live', the state of being, with learned behaviors, and uses that to conflate various senses of 'how to live?' as being the same question.  The biological question is quite distinct from the philosophical question, and the latter very well can be 'learned'.  (The former we can learn the answer to, even if we are biologically programmed to fulfill it - to eat, sleep, breathe, etc..., we just don't need to particularly learn the doing of a lot of it - breathing, for example, is controlled subconsciously by the hypothalmus iirc - even if we can learn the answer to the question).

 

Now, can we read and learn from people who are dead?  Sure - but not from their ghosts.  We can learn from what they wrote.  We can learn from stories told about them.  But all the learning is happening without any direct intervention of the dead.  If Derrida thinks there's anything revolutionary about 'people and events can cause things to happen after they die', he's been smoking something, and its probably stronger than pot.

 

"Vote aff to affirm the presencing of the Olmec, our challenging of the life-death binary rejects all risk based analysis in favor of guidance by our very own subconscious. Risk is nothing more than an authoritarian lackluster force that binds us to life while separating ourselves from the other." - more nonsense.  Our subconscious doesn't engage in risked based analysis?  How do you know?  Where does guidance by our own subconscious lead us?  How does this have anything to do with dead civilizations like the Olmec?

Gunder doesn't understand what risk actually is.  Risk isn't about lack of understanding, its about assessing uncertainty.  That uncertainty frequently doesn't come from a failure to understand, it comes from missing data whose relationship to the problem we do understand (and if we had that data it would improve our predictions but not our theoretical understanding), or oftentimes comes from uncertainty.  Nothing stops perfect awareness of the cause of our uncertainty.  (Consider physics, where error analysis can often measure our uncertainty precisely based on the known quality of our instruments - that's a perfectly understood uncertainty, and the risk is that we reach an incorrect conclusion because of that error - which is why we do error analysis to estimate that risk).  OTOH, true lack of understanding would make risk analysis impossible, because it would preclude a useful model in which to estimate risk in the first place.

 

Conflating 'undecidable and unknown' (which is not what all risk analysis is about, but whatever) with 'lack of understanding' is a severe error in thought that destroys his warrants.

 

The Baudrillard '2 card is both nonsense and evil.  (Also totally without any sort of warrants).  As to a first refutation, seeking to not die is not the same thing as being denied death.

 

The Baudrillard '76 card is also terrible.  First, racist use of the word 'Indian' to mean native american. Second, the idea that racism is a modern phenomenon basically ignores several thousand years of recorded history.  He's explicitly whitewashing the racism of Spanish and Portugese colonialism in South America, which is pretty offensive.

 

"prefer our framework as spectral influence is not objective."

Also, not measurable, at all.  One would be tempted to say 'necessarily zero'.

 

 

Negative Strategy will be a Hobbes DA linking to 'guidance by subconscious', and a K of anti-empiricism with a CP Alt of 'explain the unknown by scientific investigation' with an education plank, which also solves for any fear better.   Counter-RoB will be whomever reduces unexplained phenomena the best, and thus solves the most fear, as per the tag to their Mical evidence.

 

Well he did say he made it overnight and that it was very rushed so...yeah...

Edited by Theparanoiacmachine
  • Upvote 8

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...