Nodulux 54 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 Hey, so I'm currently working on a file to answer K affs, a Topicality-Framework argument. My question is, what are your favorite impacts to this kind of argument? What are some things to know before I run it? How can I make the argument that Topicality should come before even "priori" questions of mindset? Any help is appreciated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Debater89012347089 13 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 There are some pretty good card from the Rostrum about how K-affs/debates that talk about personal beliefs will lead to the destruction of debate because it will make it hard to justify going to debate (to schoolboards, teachers, parents, etc.) as it could be seen as harmful (voting against identity and the such.) They work extra well if the aff claims to solve for racism/sexism. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nodulux 54 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 There are some pretty good card from the Rostrum about how K-affs/debates that talk about personal beliefs will lead to the destruction of debate because it will make it hard to justify going to debate (to schoolboards, teachers, parents, etc.) as it could be seen as harmful (voting against identity and the such.) They work extra well if the aff claims to solve for racism/sexism. I like that argument, but many K-affs argue that their beliefs are priori/outweigh the destruction of debate. Is there good arguments as to why destruction of debate space outweighs all other impacts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Debater89012347089 13 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 I like that argument, but many K-affs argue that their beliefs are priori/outweigh the destruction of debate. Is there good arguments as to why destruction of debate space outweighs all other impacts? I have some debate first files I can send you, mostly the argument is magnitude. We can either have this one debate (which in reality isn't going to change anyone's beliefs in round and only effects everything under the meta-debate) or the judge can vote Neg and make stance that insures debate's survival for the greater good which is better future politics yadda yadda yadda. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nodulux 54 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 I have some debate first files I can send you, mostly the argument is magnitude. We can either have this one debate (which in reality isn't going to change anyone's beliefs in round and only effects everything under the meta-debate) or the judge can vote Neg and make stance that insures debate's survival for the greater good which is better future politics yadda yadda yadda. That's pretty sweet. Could you send me that? I'd be much obliged! If you want anything in return, I might be able to help you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kylerbuckner 1164 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 That's pretty sweet. Could you send me that? I'd be much obliged! If you want anything in return, I might be able to help you. same please, I have files as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BernieSanders 1775 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 I think the arg can also be contextualized as "Debate is not a radical forum". I'd like to see if cards exist that bring into question the idea of K aff's having any revolutionary potential. How is your time here in the tip-top of the ivory tower actually useful to the proletariat and subaltern people of society? I think you can turn this into a larger K of the Ivory tower and that can answer almost every K aff in a way that doesn't get you attacked for being racist/sexist/*insert identity politics* here for reading framework. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobbyTables 298 Report post Posted February 24, 2015 How do the warrants for why their education doesn't help anybody not apply equally to your education? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
