Jump to content

ABadDebator

Member
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Okay

About ABadDebator

  • Rank
    Novice

Recent Profile Visitors

596 profile views
  1. ABadDebator

    categorical imperative

    I still don't understand the categorical imperative, even though it's so commonly run. Does it say that an action is immoral if once it's universalized it makes the action itself impossible or that once it's universalized it contradicts the original intent of the action? Basically, does it say that a. Lying is bad because if it was universalized, there would be no concept of truth so it's impossible to lie or b. Lying is bad because if it was universalized, there would be no point to lying as no one would believe what you said anyway?
  2. ABadDebator

    Kant help

    Can someone give me an ELI5 on transcendentalism and the noumena(how it's applicable to debate)? Please I really really need help
  3. ABadDebator

    Zizek "Do Nothing" Alt

    Can someone please explain this alt simply? After reading the card, I'm still not quite sure what it is getting at. Please explain it like you are explaining it to a fifth-grader, I'm not very good at dissecting complicated phrases.
  4. ABadDebator

    Kritik Help

    Alright, thanks!
  5. ABadDebator

    Kritik Help

    Wait, actually I still have one more question. In your example of an impact being that human supremacy over nature was violent, would I have to justify why that is an intrinsic bad, or can I just assume that is bad and move on? Would I have to include why it is bad in my framework somehow?
  6. ABadDebator

    Kritik Help

    Thanks, that really cleared it up!
  7. ABadDebator

    Kritik Help

    I'm know that I'm bad at debate, but I would really appreciate it if someone took the time to help me. Ok so, I'm not quite sure how each the parts of a kritik function. I'm not talking about kritikal affs or nontopical ones, like I just mean the basic kritik. So for example if I wanted to run an anthro K, does the link prove that the AC is anthropocentric, or does it prove that the AC is doing something that leads to the impact which then proves that the AC is anthropocentric? Also, how would the framework function? If I did like, the ROJ was to endorse the debater that speaks the truth, does that mean my impacts had to all lead to what the truth is? Sorry if there is something obvious I am missing here, I don't have much debate experience. Also, I would appreciate if someone explained this simply to me, without using long loopy sentences that everyone here loves.
×