Jump to content

Zar_B

Member
  • Content Count

    169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

About Zar_B

  • Rank
    Longtime Member
  • Birthday 09/14/1991

Profile Information

  • Name
    Zain Raza
  • School
    EMHS
  • Location
    OK
  1. Zar_B

    OK State 2010

    We're up on this wiki. http://oklahoma-disclosure.wikispaces.com/
  2. Zar_B

    OK State 2010

    Thus we advocate the following policy, The United States federal government should provide all necessary funding and eliminate all unnecessary restrictions on the Legal Services Corporation in providing social services to people specified by the resolution. Available funding should be increased and federal restrictions on the following should be removed: *Class Action Lawsuits *Restrictions on Non-Governmental & Local Aid. This was the plan text we read at Regionals. Also - for the teams that haven't disclose cites/advantages, would you mind at least disclosing advantages read so far?
  3. Zar_B

    OK State 2010

    At Regionals we read a Legal Services Corporation AFF with Predatory Lending, Unemployment, Health, and Environmental Justice advantages.
  4. Zar_B

    Expired Links

    If you cut a card from the internet and the link expires (and you can't find the card on another url), should it be axed?
  5. Zar_B

    Poverty Good

    Maybe people should not read shitty arguments. Maybe people should come up with something more realistic (and easier to defend) then poverty good, because if the opposing team has any idea what they're doing, they'll beat you down if you try and impact turn poverty. As other people have stated, it's better to go for a link turn or an impact outweighs argument (potentially paired up with legitimate defense against their poverty arguments). Also, claiming that preserving poverty is good is morally reprehensible in the eyes of some people; some judges might find it very repulsive, which could be harmful in a debate round - something to keep in mind.
  6. Conditionality - they can drop the K/CP when we want to. Dispositionality - there are multiple definitions, but the one I've heard most often is that if you put offense on the K/CP, they have to answer it, but if you only have defense, they can kick it like in conditionality.
  7. Was it on politics?
  8. Define education. And how is it gained?
  9. Zar_B

    Education CP

    Wouldn't you have a very delayed timeframe? It would take at least four years for the CP to have any real effect, unless you're forcing everyone to take an accelerated program (which seems kind of silly & would still have a long timeframe), or unless you can somehow link perception of increasing US education in a field to solving AFF advantages.
  10. Zar_B

    Types of Turns

    Well that's kind of silly. Have debaters become so stupid that we cannot recognize the same argument said with different words? Using the "proper" terminology is all well and good, but it's the argument that counts.
  11. From the new generation - Weavile and Hippowdon.
  12. Wrong, you might have a different interpretation of what atheism means, but my interpretation is just as acceptable. I define atheism as the rejection of belief in a deity/deities, a form of gnosticism. My arguments are based on the worldly benefits for the adoption of faith, not on the potential after-worldly benefits of endorsing a particular theology. These are still arguments against atheism because they call for an endorsing of theology (which you cede is in contrast to atheism), I'm just not putting one theology over another.
  13. As a precursor, I don't really endorse the arguments I'm about to make. I'm not really "religious" in any sense, I think that implies dogma, which I don't embrace. -------------------------------------- First of all, there is no reason to endorse Pascal's Wager, I agree its flawed for many reasons. Now of course, you raise the possibility of being punished for being "religious". However, since neither of can know what the response of a deity/deities would be to human worship, it is most logical to apply equal probability to there being no impact/rewards/consequences for faith or a particular type of faith. Because of this, we should not logically support a religion because of its supposed after-worldy benefits. However, if it can be proven that atheism is a logically incorrect position and that being "religious" has a positive impact in our current lives, then being "religious" would be the best option because of maximizing our current lives. But to be an atheist, you have deny the existence of the possibility of deities. This is "scientific objectivity" at its worst. To be an atheist, you must presume that because your physical senses cannot test the existence of a God or multiple Gods/Godesses/etc., that such a being/beings cannot exist. This ignores the fact that there are other dimensions that humans cannot perceive/understand. The human ability to understand the universe through scientific/logical means is inherently limited because we are human. If one truly wishes to be logical, the proper response is that one cannot know for sure whether or not a deity or multiple dieties exist. That means it is a question of faith/belief. Ultimately, faith has its benefits. This is not to say that people should blindly follow authority. However, belonging to a certain group and sharing an identity/beliefs is beneficial. It provides a source of physical satisfaction because it satisfies the innate biological want to "belong", to be part of a larger social structure. Furthermore, for those that "believe' more strongly, the concept of heaven is another source of satisfaction in current life. Whether or not this heaven exists, it is a source of content that has allowed billions to face death without fear, to live life comfortably. The value of this is immeasurable, we simply cannot calculate the psychological damage caused by the fear of death. In this way, religion allows people to accept death, even if it may perhaps be a delusion.
  14. That's not the point he was making (I think). He is saying that the average impact card has fewer/as many warrants as Immortal Technique's songs, and citing one card as an example. It may have been a bad example, but the argument hasn't actually been addressed.
×
×
  • Create New...