Nonegfiat 645 Report post Posted November 1, 2017 what comes to mind when yall hear "worst argument in debate?"not including things like racism good because that's obv not an argument I for one really hate death good. I think it's violent but people seem to get away with it 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheSnowball 1433 Report post Posted November 1, 2017 Just check your signature... 9 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nonegfiat 645 Report post Posted November 1, 2017 Just check your signature... Yes. 100%. That thing is a meme of an argument Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elmeryang00 134 Report post Posted November 1, 2017 Antonio 95. Hands down. 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chaos 2587 Report post Posted November 1, 2017 Constitutionality is a d-rule. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cakeisawesome12345 28 Report post Posted November 2, 2017 Constitutionality is a d-rule. I really want to see that in a round. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheSnowball 1433 Report post Posted November 2, 2017 Constitutionality is a d-rule. "Kant's ideas should control the understanding of the Constitution, most particularly the commands of due process of law, as Part IV explains. Although never explicitly cited as authority, Kant's dignity principle informs modern due process jurisprudence, which is sensible because the Constitution was drafted to enforce the moral quest commemorated in the Declaration. The comfortable application of Kantian ethics to constitutional due process demonstrates that, in the singular sense described above, the Constitution should be, must be and is a suicide pact." 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KushPatel 19 Report post Posted November 2, 2017 Someone ran something against me once called the Save the Whales argument. Basically, you are being evil for helping people because you are viewing them as helpless thus like the whales. 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GracchusBabeuf 39 Report post Posted November 2, 2017 welp, antonio is in every 1nc guess i’m a bad person arsn’t i Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B3njaminX 1 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) Someone ran something against me once called the Save the Whales argument. Basically, you are being evil for helping people because you are viewing them as helpless thus like the whales. White savorism Edited November 3, 2017 by B3njaminX 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GracchusBabeuf 39 Report post Posted November 4, 2017 Someone ran something against me once called the Save the Whales argument. Basically, you are being evil for helping people because you are viewing them as helpless thus like the whales.your explanation of the argument is a gross simplification into a straw man logical fallacy. this is actually a very common argument supported by many critics, i.e. bauman, baudrillard, lacan, and other postmodern theorists. whomever you hit must have not been well-read 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GracchusBabeuf 39 Report post Posted November 4, 2017 if you want to break debate, just argue “condo is severance” trust me, someone tried it against me Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KushPatel 19 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 your explanation of the argument is a gross simplification into a straw man logical fallacy. this is actually a very common argument supported by many critics, i.e. bauman, baudrillard, lacan, and other postmodern theorists. whomever you hit must have not been well-read Sorry about my simplification- I just tried to explain how I understood it from my opponent Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GracchusBabeuf 39 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 Sorry about my simplification- I just tried to explain how I understood it from my opponentno apology needed, hope i didn’t come off as hostile Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Miro 1470 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) <p>Spark</p> Edited November 5, 2017 by Miro 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chaos 2587 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 I want to see somebody read Wipeout with an insect suffering impact. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonSays 2 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 Someone from my league ran Anthro K with Wipeout as a CP and won 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VishvakBandi 5 Report post Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) <> Edited March 14, 2018 by VishvakBandi 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DisBoiuLIfe 55 Report post Posted November 6, 2017 I think one of the worst arguments is baudrillard because it's plain false 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DogeDuck 6 Report post Posted November 6, 2017 T - Substantial With the interpretation being that the aff must increase by x percent Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheSnowball 1433 Report post Posted November 6, 2017 T - Substantial With the interpretation being that the aff must increase by x percent I mean, I don't know. If the Aff specified they give a $1,000 grant to STEM, I might try T Substantial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GracchusBabeuf 39 Report post Posted November 6, 2017 I want to see somebody read Wipeout with an insect suffering impact.bet. i’ll make sure to have a performance too. my partner and i will recreate the sufferring the insects undergo. it’ll be an automatic neg ballot, because they’ll concede the performance and then there will be bataille surrealism in the 2nc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheTrashDebater 168 Report post Posted November 6, 2017 bet. i’ll make sure to have a performance too. my partner and i will recreate the sufferring the insects undergo. it’ll be an automatic neg ballot, because they’ll concede the performance and then there will be bataille surrealism in the 2nc That reminds me of something but I can't put my finger on it 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DogeDuck 6 Report post Posted November 7, 2017 (edited) I mean, I don't know. If the Aff specified they give a $1,000 grant to STEM, I might try T Substantial. In that case I feel like the interp wouldn't be a percentage. Regardless of what one considers substantial, we can probably all agree that a thousand dollars to fund a program that cost millions or even billions isnt "a large amount". My problem comes when teams run T - Substantial with interps that are taken waaaaaay out of context(a one about substantial must be 20% in relation to apartment tenants comes to mind). Also how do you prove that the aff is increasing by a percent? Is funding STEM by a billion dollars 20 percent or 99%? Its just a argument that teams waste time on, never go for, and I feel devalues the educational side of debate as we all wasted time on a pointless argument. Edit: I hate T - Increase - Pre-existence for the same reason. Even if I am creating a new program, I still have to find lit as to how said program solves my harms or creates my advantages, thus lit probably exists as to why that program doesn't work Edited November 7, 2017 by DogeDuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NickDB8 508 Report post Posted November 7, 2017 In that case I feel like the interp wouldn't be a percentage. Regardless of what one considers substantial, we can probably all agree that a thousand dollars to fund a program that cost millions or even billions isnt "a large amount". My problem comes when teams run T - Substantial with interps that are taken waaaaaay out of context(a one about substantial must be 20% in relation to apartment tenants comes to mind). Also how do you prove that the aff is increasing by a percent? Is funding STEM by a billion dollars 20 percent or 99%? Its just a argument that teams waste time on, never go for, and I feel devalues the educational side of debate as we all wasted time on a pointless argument. Edit: I hate T - Increase - Pre-existence for the same reason. Even if I am creating a new program, I still have to find lit as to how said program solves my harms or creates my advantages, thus lit probably exists as to why that program doesn't work i've started reading t - substantial is of sizeable quantity against small affs, or something similar. picked up going for it in a lay round vs the natives aff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites