in a debate round, the claim is that meditative thinking is a prerequisite for successful action because the technological thinking inherent in the 1AC conceals important aspects of reality. questioning of ontology allows us to see more clearly what action (if any) should be taken to address a supposed problem. the negative should claim that the harms outlined in the 1ac are the result of calculative/technological thought and that by opening up space to see that this form of thinking is merely one reality among many and not reality in and of itself, the negative provides a manor to better address the "problems" the technological system keeps claiming justify its use: indeed, the negative will conclude that the "problems" are not only a result of the technological mindset but can only be addressed by a rejection of that mindset: that the aff simply smears on another bandaid to try to cover the gash through the heart of human subjectivity (and in fact will probably infect the wound). the tricky alt will claim that it does not preclude all uses of technological thought, and in fact, will claim that after successfully disconnecting our view of reality with exclusive technological thinking, that we can engage in technological thought without being bound to it.
also, if all else fails, ontology o/w and is a prerequisite to value to life. so sitting around, smoking weed, and thinking about da-sein is more important than preventing global nuclear omnicide anyway*.
*especially since said omnicide isnt real/is a product of technological thought.