Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About King_Smash

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Name
  • School
  1. I had a hard time deciding what to use as a value and what to use as a criterion. I think that the message is about the same both ways. C1: I'm working on replacing C3: I agree, but in my circuit (which I am new too) resolutional analysis are not used, so I thought that this would perhaps be the best place to make that point. I will reword the tagline thought. Thanks for the help!
  2. v: societal welfare Cr: self transcendence c1: it is universally moral to fight suffering c2: self transcendence can only occur in a healthy society c3: Fulfilling a moral obligation does not mean seeing to the complete solution of another's problems Thoughts?
  3. Hey, I need some help my value is societal welfare and there are allot of options for criterions. How does empathy sound? Veil of ignorance maybe? or is there a better choice that i am missing out on? Thanks for the help
  4. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wvL6ZFaQ3XOHk3z8AreAUHbIpVc0caanUYK6iNOl6gM/edit This is a google document for aff. Its open for all with the link. Contribute if you want
  5. idk maybe. There was a team running categorical imperative aff, and allot of negs stating that morals are not needed because of government and law. What division were you judging?
  6. how would a naturalism aff look? I googled it and now i am confused
  7. Tourney this weekend was weird. Basically if you actually won with aff you got at least fourth. Almost everyone went 2 in 2 with both wins from neg. Even thought i went 2 in 2 i was only two speaker points off from placing. This topic is insanely neg biased. I saw only one value, Morality, and no good aff arguments :/
  8. I'm rewriting my case now what do you suggest egoism? nihilism? I looked at running a case like this before. Some contenion taglines and v and cr ideas would be a life saver.
  9. Aff I use Gross national prosperity as success and happiness which is like societal welfare, but it also brings implementation into picture do to the success aspect Neg C1: Not many people have the stats on hand to prove against it, and given to the large amount of help that would be giving to an individual in need because more people are not in need. C2: links to criterion because it points out the inconsistency of aff implication. I don't know what you mean by "responds to it" C3: I think that you are taking that different than it is imposed in my case... My circuit is filled with mom judges so you literally have reduce the amount of complex philosophy I also have alot of not cards that mention the benefits of moral obligations, so i am prepared for a debate on that level. I have read this whole thread If you don't mind me asking what philosophies are you running
  10. First tourney tomorrow for this topic. I'm keeping it relatively simple. Aff V: Gross National Prosperity Cr: Pragmatism( using this to sir things up a bit) C1: The large impacts of help A: Local impacts B: National impacts C2: Safety Net C3: helping is mutually beneficial Neg V: Gross National Prosperity Cr: Pragmatism C1: Assisting creates dependency C2: ethical relativism C3: Individuals that are unable to help A: Handicap individuals B: Individuals with problems of there own Any ideas for improvement? Thanks alot! This site has been super helpful
  11. My other questions is this case only going to be philosophical or is there some real world applications of this theory that i am missing. In other words I would like some method of weighing.
  12. How safe is it to run this on aff? I'm scared that if I run something along those lines on aff that I am going to get smashed for removing neg ground. Or should that even be a concern?
  • Create New...