Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Here are a couple ideas:

1) Fear/security

2) Being in relation to the environment (various deep ecology type arguments)

3) Buddhism

 

But.......

My question is how to you capture the idea of oceans?  How do you represent the oceans?

How to do you value the oceans?

 

To me.....you have to think deeply about the 2 questions.

 

I'm curious if Luke/Foucault (also called eco-mod could work).

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I think the best option for something such as oceans would be an environmental plan. I'm in the brainstorming phase of course and half of it is just that I don't know everything I could know about oceans that would help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yeah how do you value the oceans when the entire topic is about developing and exploring the oceans..

~dOnTbEToPiCaL~

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~eXpEcT fRaMeWoRk DeBaTeS fOr DaYz, BuT yOu ShOuLd WiN tHeSe If YoU aRe A k-TeAm~

~nO fRaMeWoRk Is SwEg~

fixed

Gotta be true to the original

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW is calculative

Wait, if I say framework is calculative, can I say that all framework besides ontological framework is calculative? Because I run with ontological framework and that seems like a good argument..

Edited by MichaelCeraKnockOff
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was originally thinking of a plan text that specifically says to do nothing and to stop all ocean development/exploration stuff, but my team shot that down with topicality and fxt. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't do a plan. I can send you a Heidegger aff I had from last year if you want.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, if I say framework is calculative, can I say that all framework besides ontological framework is calculative? Because I run with ontological framework and that seems like a good argument..

Probably not that specific argument, but I'd wager you can find policy focus or curriculum focus is calculative.  Alternatively, you can argue that the neg's use of framework is calculative because the only reason they're making the argument is to exclude you and win the round.  As long as you're making your analysis specific to the round, you can probably win that they link a lot harder than you do.  That being said, I'm not a Heidegger expert, so I may be way off the mark.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not that specific argument, but I'd wager you can find policy focus or curriculum focus is calculative.  Alternatively, you can argue that the neg's use of framework is calculative because the only reason they're making the argument is to exclude you and win the round.  As long as you're making your analysis specific to the round, you can probably win that they link a lot harder than you do.  That being said, I'm not a Heidegger expert, so I may be way off the mark.

If you could possibly tell me where to find those or send those if you have them to? If not that's ok I can probably find them eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't do a plan. I can send you a Heidegger aff I had from last year if you want.

yeah that'd be great. i have the hyper distance and dolphins aff at the moment. Is your plan a discourse? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a couple ideas:

1) Fear/security

2) Being in relation to the environment (various deep ecology type arguments)

3) Buddhism

 

But.......

My question is how to you capture the idea of oceans?  How do you represent the oceans?

How to do you value the oceans?

 

To me.....you have to think deeply about the 2 questions.

 

I'm curious if Luke/Foucault (also called eco-mod could work).

Ummm... What does Buddhism have to do with the topic. Sorry, but this is the first time I've ever heard of Heidegger affirmatives before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~dOnTbEToPiCaL~

 

 

eXpEcT fRaMeWoRk DeBaTeS fOr DaYz, BuT yOu ShOuLd WiN tHeSe If YoU aRe A k-TeAm

 

 

nO fRaMeWoRk Is SwEg

Y-U-DO-tolq36.jpg

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhism is a silly K that perfcons itself.  (Arguing for a win pretty much bites the K and makes you a bad buddhist.  You need to escape the world of desire, not be motivated by it.)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhism is a silly K that perfcons itself.  (Arguing for a win pretty much bites the K and makes you a bad buddhist.  You need to escape the world of desire, not be motivated by it.)

Well, then it comes down to Role of the Ballot really. And if you do what you do for Heidegger, you just say that the role of the ballot is to promote Buddhist thinking in the debate realm which makes you a good Buddhist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhism is a silly K that perfcons itself.  (Arguing for a win pretty much bites the K and makes you a bad buddhist.  You need to escape the world of desire, not be motivated by it.

 

Well, then it comes down to Role of the Ballot really. And if you do what you do for Heidegger, you just say that the role of the ballot is to promote Buddhist thinking in the debate realm which makes you a good Buddhist. 

And I mean, it really comes down to how you mold a Kritik because you can really mold a kritik in any shape or form if you know it well (which is why you read the lit) but yeah, you'd just have to say that your ROB is to promote Buddhist qualities in the debate round and out of the debate round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, then it comes down to Role of the Ballot really. And if you do what you do for Heidegger, you just say that the role of the ballot is to promote Buddhist thinking in the debate realm which makes you a good Buddhist. 

 

Yeah, but you made that the role of the ballot out of a desire to win the round.  A true Buddhist would concede the round for the opportunity to enlighten the other participants instead of having a competitive debate.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...