MattYee 8 Report post Posted May 15, 2018 Looking for a normativity Kritik for my team. Anyone know where I could find one? Thanks in advance. 2 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Masterdebater3000 10 Report post Posted May 17, 2018 There is this thing called google you can find it at google.com It is very helpful for research to cut your own kritik 1 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ButteredMuffin 1440 Report post Posted May 17, 2018 This is a meh argument on it's own that can be accomplished through an analytic to supplant a discourse/representations/experiential focus first k, like "their aff doesnt actually occur, 2 impacts, first is presumption, the aff can't resolve their impacts; second, we have criticized the way they depict 'x' in this debate, you should evaluate impacts to their presentation before scenario-based impacts of the aff." A discourse first card or two is helpful. Schlag just says academic legal discourse is vacuous, creates a savior complex, and contributes to "the field of pain and death." It's notable that this is in no way contextual to the aff and ends up being a presumption type argument that most judges would accept the response of "obvi the aff doesn't actually happen the education of what we discuss is important because scenario planning (or whatever)." Basically you don't need nearly 30 year old cards to make an obvious statement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OutKTheK 60 Report post Posted May 17, 2018 the field of pain and death This may be the edgiest thing I've ever seen a k author say, and I've seen some pretty edgy shit from k authors 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattYee 8 Report post Posted May 21, 2018 This is a meh argument on it's own that can be accomplished through an analytic to supplant a discourse/representations/experiential focus first k, like "their aff doesnt actually occur, 2 impacts, first is presumption, the aff can't resolve their impacts; second, we have criticized the way they depict 'x' in this debate, you should evaluate impacts to their presentation before scenario-based impacts of the aff." A discourse first card or two is helpful. Schlag just says academic legal discourse is vacuous, creates a savior complex, and contributes to "the field of pain and death." It's notable that this is in no way contextual to the aff and ends up being a presumption type argument that most judges would accept the response of "obvi the aff doesn't actually happen the education of what we discuss is important because scenario planning (or whatever)." Basically you don't need nearly 30 year old cards to make an obvious statement. Thanks so much! I think i'll cut a short K just to have evidence for it. The premise is a whole lot clearer now. thanks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites