Jump to content

zizekmatrix

Member
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Okay

About zizekmatrix

  • Rank
    Novice

Profile Information

  • Name
    Julia
  • School
    Riverwood Int. HS
  1. I may even need to create a new topic/search for the explanation of Heidegger b/c that's more extreme than what i've read My understanding is that Heidegger's positioning on "knowing" was that everyone's understanding of the world was flawed, and that, in conquest of 'being,' we should all strive to better understand why we do the things we do and eventually act upon that. This is where his meditative thought alts come from. That we make life unauthentic because our knowledge, it's use, and formulation is inappropriate. I'm sure it's not a stretch to argue that because of this we do 1 & 2
  2. 2 and a half weeks until SDI - I'm gettin' antsy.

  3. that's probably what people are going to end up doing anyway - thanks thanks. i thought as much, alts seem like the same thing too
  4. gg https://www.newscientist.com/article/2093356-carbon-nanotubes-too-weak-to-get-a-space-elevator-off-the-ground/
  5. I've been going through various camp files that have been put out and came across my first Pan K(WSDI) Last year was my first year debating under the Surveillance topic. Needless to say we ran several security Ks. I'm not seeing a major distinction between what both these Kritiks are saying? Pan K seems to be saying that U.S. security mindset puts China in a threatening light, whereas Security K says crisis rhetoric normalizes threats(especially those having to do with the 'other'). Am I missing something in the interpretation of these cards? Pan K just seems to be in better context with China. links to both- Weber: http://www.weberdebatecamp.com/ Georgetown: https://gds16.wikispaces.com/Evidence
×
×
  • Create New...