Jump to content

Turtle

Member
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Turtle

  • Rank
    Varsity
  1. I need some ideas to answer these arguments more effectively with analytics. The autonomy NC is just that universal health care violates people's autonomy. The Rawls AC is basically people chose UHC behind the veil of ignorance
  2. I need some ideas to answer these arguments more effectively with analytics. The autonomy NC is just that universal health care violates people's autonomy. The Rawls AC is basically people chose UHC behind the veil of ignorance.
  3. I need some ideas to answer these arguments more effectively with analytics. The autonomy NC is just that universal health care violates people's autonomy. The Rawls AC is basically people chose UHC behind the veil of ignorance.
  4. You are completely right. I'm a fraud and a fake. It's best I quit. Thanks for the feedback.
  5. ALL K's must have alternatives. As a critical aff, your alt will be your plan or res. Make sure to not get caught up in criticizing something and forget about solvency. This is usually the biggest mistake debaters make with critical affs.
  6. Turtle

    Debate Team

    Does anyone know where I can find a link to this?
  7. I love debate. I love the arguments. I love the limitlessness. I love all the things I've learned. But frankly I think I suck. I always end up going 2-2 at every tournament . I'm just as smart as anyone on the national circuit is. I always write the best cases and I am fantastic in cross-x. The problem is i can't give a decent rebuttal to save my life, especially in the 1 AR. I haven't won an Aff round all year. I keep losing to people who I know don't have better arguments then mine but can make them sound like there better. I hate this. Are rebuttals like an inherent natural talent that certain people posses? Is there a strat I don't know about? Will I ever learn to give a rebuttal or should i just give up?
  8. Does anybody have a card that says the U.S has certain side constraints. Like the U.S has an obligation towards National Security but it cant do things like enslave people. I know this is obvious, but I need it.
  9. In general the neg argues a non-congnetive framework about how I cant make any normative claims, because moral facts dont exist. Another one they will run is error theory in which they say that moral facts do exist but they are all false. I want to argue that moral facts can exist and can be true by making some appeal to something that isnt normative.
  10. Honestly just call it a burden....thats what everyone does
  11. Can somebody please give me some cites or cards explaining why skep is bad for debate or at least a generic answers to skep. Thanks
  12. I personally don't think you will have to worry about truth testing this year because of the topics. You should look into a comparative worlds burden.
  13. No such thing. In LD, the current trend is to have a value and a standard(same thing as a criterion) and everything that is between those two is called the framework.The frameworks job is to justify the standard and value. The framework also seeks to explain why the resolution is true thru some meta-ethical paradigm. The stuff about burdens is generally just thrown somewhere in the framework(mostly near the beginning). The burden is justified by something in your framework. But honestly everyone has their own style, so its your job to adapt. I'm not sure if this is what your where looking for, but I hope it helps.
×
×
  • Create New...