Jump to content
theydb8r

Why do people dislike anthro so much

Recommended Posts

1. It links to everything but does so badly. 2. Its impact arguments make no sense alongside the relativism often advanced.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because sometimes there are arguments that are just so bad they become wrong, even if there is truth to them. Even if almost all of it is true, sometimes they're just wrong anyway. 

 

That's what anthro is. Your cards might be right, but your wrong. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Particularly because its read against affirmatives saying that racism/sexism or something else is bad and they're saying that the oppression of the animal must come first

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Particularly because its read against affirmatives saying that racism/sexism or something else is bad and they're saying that the oppression of the animal must come first

I know I've already used this line recently, but please, sir, may I have a question?

 

You say that as if it's obvious that "oppression of the animal" does not come first. That's what the debate is about. I'm not taking a stance on the issue here, but that is not something that is prima facie obvious.

 

You may be completely right in your implicit statement that oppression of the animal doesn't come first, but that's not an obvious point, and the fact that it's not obvious is my point.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say that as if it's obvious that "oppression of the animal" does not come first. That's what the debate is about. I'm not taking a stance on the issue here, but that is not something that is prima facie obvious.

 

You may be completely right in your implicit statement that oppression of the animal doesn't come first, but that's not an obvious point, and the fact that it's not obvious is my point.

I'm addressing the reason that people don't like the argument. Talking about the oppression of animals is more important/a pre-req to racism is contrary to societal moral norms-- which is the reason that many people don't like the argument.

 

My beliefs (I don't believe the oppression of the animal comes first and anthro is probs inev) are irrelevant to a discussion as to why broader debate dislikes the argument.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Phantom - I think Miro's point was that (edit he posted while I wrote this explaining his point). 

 

@OP because the argument is generic, debaters can invest little time in learning the nuances or cutting topic specific links and still win rounds. It's frustrating to lose a well-written aff to a generic, recycled anthro file. I think Miro's point is also compelling. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main reasons why people don't like anthro are:

1. Links are terrible - the links in most anthro files apply to EVERYTHING, like bishop guertin read this card that was something along the lines of "slavery was bad, but at least they weren't eaten", this is dumb because

a. All animals exist within the food chain/web, just because humans are the apex predators doesn't make us terrible creatures.

b. The conditions of slaves mimicked that of modern animals(cramped conditions, bad housing, etc.)

C. Infinitely regressive - plants can feel and remember, which means if we stop eating things that feel we all die.

D. kinda ignores the whole rape, murder and torture of slaves

 

2. The impact contradicts the alt, either a. Enviro destruction leads to extinction which is good because we're just too anthropocentric or b. it's bad because because it kills us

 

3. Alt is irrelevant - animals will still eat other animals, just because humans aren't on top anymore doesn't mean everything starts living through photosynthesis

 

4. No one who reads it gives a shit about it - you never hear about debaters getting really into ecology lit or becoming activists because of anthro, whereas EVERY other argument that plays the "oppression Olympics" has some success rate in changing people's thought processes

Edited by Payton
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think when referring to the Anthro K, people get upset because it is a K that the nuances can be understood in a very short amount of time and it allows for very indepth analysis of root cause.

 

The oppression olympics seems silly to me, evolutionally anthro was most likely the "first oppression." While this doesn't mean that it is the sole root cause, I think it allows for good discussion of why we define racism,sexism, classism, ableism as sub-human but we don't like that discussion because it can be very uncomfortable.

 

I think the major headache from the debate community is 2 things, first they view the K wrong and so go for the wrong offense and second, it is not common enough like cap to have good answers but it is just common enough that people have answers which are usually super shitty. People think that anthro applies to only animals a biocentric instead of ecocentric focus. So when perms are framed as we care about animals too, they just get more links. People also think that the k is saying that humans suck and killing humans is good. That is not what the K says. It says we should not prioritize them as a brown 95 card says that it is weak anthro, we have to have a survival ethic that doesn't have any utilitarian approach. 

Also if you read like Kochi and Ordan global suicide card, it just talks about how we should be better to the environment and be locavors. Always check that alt card for their incredibly large claims.

These are the lines of offense your block should have. While it is going to take more than just reading Grey 93 to win the impact turn, it is winnable. Impact debates are easily won over the fact that the environment will be completely annihilated from nuclear war, that's not as likely to happen from the impact. Even if they are able to access that impact, it means it's too late to change our thoughts with just thoughts which means pragmatic actions is key. Besides these

First, Impact Turn. Humans are fucking awesome

 

Second, intrinsic problem with the viewing of the alt. Either they view all life as the same and then eating plants is the same as killing people or they create hierarchies in which they determine what animals/rocks/nature is more important in relations to utility or humans.

 

Third, any impact calculus will always result in humans being superior regardless of how they think of it as humans create the most change, have the greatest utility of life. Anthro inev bitches

 

Fourth, intrinsic value doesn’t exist, only the value we place upon it. Animals use for their utility just like we do.

 

Fifth, ignoring humans dying is ignoring part of the biosphere creating dehumanization and a biocentric view that makes the extermination of humans inevitable

 

Second with the common but not common enough. Anthro is seen as a second tier cap/marx because there haven't been a ton of large schools to change to it. They already have the cap work so they see no reason to make other main ks. So more and more I see anthro run by small schools who understand enough to get the links and win but not by much. You just need to have better blocks and not underestimate this debate. To be honest, in the debate community, I think we care on an individual level about anthro way more than cap.

 

People also hate how it links. There should be multiple levels of links which i don't really see anymore. Extinction should be a link from the 1ac cx. Economic and consumption links should happen. Managerial links over whatever the plan is happening over. I don't think debate has a problem with anthro as much as a poorly run anthro K

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think y'all are over thinking it. Anthro is usually run as a generic, and debaters hate generics. Look at spending, look at how a lot of people view PTX. Most of the time Anthro is people's "oh shit we have nothing to say file" among more K inclined teams (otherwise they'd be running PTX :P) so it gets a bad rep.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think y'all are over thinking it. Anthro is usually run as a generic, and debaters hate generics. Look at spending, look at how a lot of people view PTX. Most of the time Anthro is people's "oh shit we have nothing to say file" among more K inclined teams (otherwise they'd be running PTX :P) so it gets a bad rep.

This, plus like spending and politics and unlike Cap or Security, very few people outside policy debate take it seriously (I say spending isn't taken seriously outside policy debate because it's usually run and hated as a big impact DA, while in the real world anti-spending advocates treat it more as a linear DA or a policy-level K). Arguments that are both generic and conventionally silly tend to be disliked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think y'all are over thinking it. Anthro is usually run as a generic, and debaters hate generics. Look at spending, look at how a lot of people view PTX. Most of the time Anthro is people's "oh shit we have nothing to say file" among more K inclined teams (otherwise they'd be running PTX :P) so it gets a bad rep.

People don't hate generics. People hate terrible generics like politics because politics makes no sense. People don't like spending because econ decline isn't an impact 99% of the time, and when you have Royal tagged as Extinction people won't like that debate.

I think the biggest problem is with how terribly anthro is run. As someone explained it to me, judging that first round on the second day of a tournament at 7 AM, the judging lounge is all out of coffee, you ask someone about a team and you get the response "They run anthro on the aff.... and the neg," and then listen to ROCKS ARE PEOPLE TOO for the next 2 hours is the worst thing in existence.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then listen to ROCKS ARE PEOPLE TOO for the next 2 hours 

TURN - presumes "people" as the standard for valuable being - reproduces anthropocentrism, turning the case. 

This is ME slamming my face into a desk NOW. 

*fwomp* smash bang CRACK 

 

 

^ free ev

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TURN - presumes "people" as the standard for valuable being - reproduces anthropocentrism, turning the case. 

This is ME slamming my face into a desk NOW. 

*fwomp* smash bang CRACK 

 

 

^ free ev

Using the desk as a tool for self-harm reduces it's value to it's utility to humans, that's bad, (Bryant, Latour, etc.)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the desk as a tool for self-harm reduces it's value to it's utility to humans, that's bad, (Bryant, Latour, etc.)

turn - presuming the desk didn't consent abrogates object agency

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

turn - presuming the desk didn't consent abrogates object agency

Turn - Presuming that it did is just uncool

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that more Heidegger than Bryant/Latour?

Not really, OOO/ANT is kinda based off Heidegger though

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turn: the desk is sentient and you slamming your head into it made it align itself with Tellurian Lubricant to bring about the Xerodrome because it doesn't appreciate things like that. Good going guys, now we're all gonna be cremated to dust. I hope you're happy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If no one responds with a Schopenhauer turn I'm going to be very disappointed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one likes anthro, but everyone loves OOO.

 

3cd8a33a.png?1306264975

I don't like it too much, but it's shiny and new, so people typically enjoy stuff like that.

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...