Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'kritik'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Debate
    • Help Me...
    • Novice Center
    • Culture
    • Other Forms of Debate
    • Virtual Debates and Online Videos
    • Workshops, Institutes, and Camps
  • Specific Arguments
    • Immigration
    • Disadvantages and Counterplans
    • Critiques
    • Theory and Framework
  • Evidence
    • Evazon
    • Evidence Trading
  • Community
    • Current Events
    • Thoughts and Ideas
    • Non-Debate Debates
    • World Culture
  • Regional
    • National Circuit
    • Pacific
    • Mountain
    • Southwest
    • Great Plains
    • Great Lakes
    • Northeast
    • Mid Atlantic
    • South
    • Kansas
    • Missouri
    • Texas
  • Respecting the Elders
    • College
    • Judging
    • Coaching
  • The Site
    • Feedback
    • Discuss the Articles
    • Main Page Polls
  • Archive
    • Topic Archive

Categories

  • Thursday Files
  • Affirmatives
  • Case Negatives
  • Counterplans
  • Critiques
  • Disadvantages
  • Impacts
  • Theory
  • Topicality
  • LD and Public Forum

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Product Groups

There are no results to display.

Categories

  • Debate Resources
  • Coach Resources
  • Blogs
  • Videos
  • Tournaments & Results
  • Administrative Organizations

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Google Chat/Jabber


AIM


MSN


ICQ


Yahoo


Name


School


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation

Found 210 results

  1. Kojin24

    K aff help

    What is the best way to structure a K aff? I've seen many, but I'm not sure how to fully create one from scratch for myself. I'm unsure of what ideology/philosophy to use, or even how to pick what to use. Any help in how to make one would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. I've ran Ks before, so I'm familiar with how the idea of a K works.
  2. jstonemorales

    Explanation of Fems

    Can someone explain all the different types of fem Ks? Like fem ir, ecofem, etc.
  3. Collin132

    Security K help

    How does security K propose we deal with threats if we don't securitize? for example, what should we do about terrorism just let them do whatever they want, or is there a way to deal with threats without falsely constructing them.
  4. My coach refuses to allow me to run k's, I understood that last year as a first year debater. But, as a 1st yr. I made it State Quarterfinals where I had absolutely no damn clue about what a kritik was and how to defend against one. My West Tx coach continues to prohibit even the slightest interest in K's, but they never go into our rounds. I'm thinking of defying my coach and learning how to run a K, but it seems like an extremely complicated concept. I'm having trouble understanding how they work, so can anyone give me a breakdown of how K's work, how to run one, and how to defend against a K? My coach really doesn't want to help on this end, and still refuses to believe that people run K's, I got beat last yr. at State by a K, thus the interest in learning how to run one. So, can somebody please help me?
  5. kylerbuckner

    I have some ideas.

    *edit
  6. AmandaC

    wiki disclosure/ disclosure k

    is disclosure k a legitimate argument// do people still run it also how far in advance of a tournament are you expected to upload aff cites
  7. StormA03

    Cap K

    Can someone explain the gist of the Capitalism Kritik/How to run it as neg? Thanks!
  8. Hello everyone! I'm new to this forum and I'm doing a presentation on the strategic application of accelerationism as a K. However, I'm very confused on the parts of the K and just the debate strategy in general. I'm kind of unclear on the four parts. Our novice teams are only running one K, and that's the cap k. Most of my knowledge is based on that (and a couple other varsity K rounds I flowed). My current understanding of accelerationism is mostly based on the accelerationist manifesto, and it's that capitalism should be accelerated for the late benefits of technological evolution in order to create a future for a world threatened by the deterimental effects of capitalism, such as climate change and governmental problems. I think I understand the philosophy but I have no idea how it's run as a K. So here goes: 1. Link In the cap k the aff links to capitalism which links to the impacts by supporting capitalist ideas, for example trade. However, accelerationism is about accelerating capitalism for the late BENEFITS. Isn't this good? Does that mean affs who don't support accelerationism are bad because they doom the world by not creating a new future? Idk. 2. Impact The impact is good, right? Technological evolution to save a future. I don't really understand this part because the impact should be the undesirable effects. 3. Alternative I guess this part is pretty clear, that the alternative is to accelerate capitalism in order to technologically evolve and save a world in danger. 4. Framework Framework is how the judge should evaluate the round in my understanding, so in this case a possible fw could be the judge should vote for the team that creates a world post-capitalism. This is all my understanding of accelerationism thus far. We aren't expected to run it or master it, but have a general understanding. It would be greatly GREATLY appreciated if someone could look over and help me in understanding the link and impact! Thank you very much!
  9. ace007dm

    Anthro K

    I'm a novice and I'm pretty comfortable with the thesis of the anthro kritik. This is the first kritik I'm comfortable going for in the 2NR. I've never gone for a kritik before in the 2NR so I'm not exactly sure how to properly extend the framework and the alternative and the shell and how to allocate the 2NR properly. Could anyone help explain how my 2NR should be structured? Thanks!
  10. OutKTheK

    Orthodox Marxism PIK

    Hello, What would the plan text for an Orthodox Marxism PIK look like? Note: I'm not actually going to advocate Marxism as a pragmatic solution, but the alt is to endorse it and create the intellectual opportunity necessary to start a Marxist revolution, not to advocate the revolution itself. I don't know if Marxism is ever run differently, so I just wanted to put that in there.
  11. kylerbuckner

    Trade

    Im looking to trade some files I have for some k's, preferably nothing from openev, anything from ecofem to schopenhauer Im open to it, just trying to trade broaden the backfiles..
  12. TrojanCondoK

    Can someone go indepth about Anthro K?

    I'm supposed to run anthro k with my partner this friday, and I only have a basic idea of what it is. Can someone help me out and really explain this to me?
  13. lucian19

    How to answer a Kritik

    How do you answer kritiks you have never heard or do not have anything specifically planned for?
  14. ElegantWaffle

    Heidegger's Nearness?

    Hello all. I need some help with Heidegger today. I really want to run this K and the impact is the destruction of our essential relationship with Being because the technical thought of the aff destroys nearness and "the thing". I don't really understand what any of that means though. Could someone explain it to me? I tried to read "The Thing" to get a better understanding of what nearness is but that just confused me a lot more. What is nearness? What is thinginess? Why is our relationship with Being so much more important than nuclear war? Thanks in advance. This is the impact card by the way. Please explain it to me ;-; *The aff’s world subsumed by calculative technological thought destroys our ontological relationship with Being. Our instant access to everything as a tool for use obliterates the essential being of all things making even total planetary destruction a radically less important issue and a likely inevitability. **gender paraphrased Caputo 93 (john, Demythologizing Heidegger, p. 136-41) The essence of technology is nothing technological; the essence of language is nothing linguistic; the essence of starvation has nothing to do with being hungry; the essence of homelessness has nothing to do with being out in the cold. Is this not to repeat a most classical philosophical gesture, to submit to the oldest philosophical desire of all, the desire for the pure and uncontaminated, not to mention the safe and secure? (2) In his essay "The Thing" Heidegger remarks upon the prospect of a nuclear conflagration which could extinguish all human life: [hu]Man stares at what the explosion of the atom bomb could bring with it. He does not see that what has long since taken place and has already happened expels from itself as its last emission the atom bomb and its explosion—not to mention the single nuclear bomb, whose triggering, thought through to its utmost poten­tial, might be enough to snuff out all life on earth. (VA, 165/PLT, 166). In a parallel passage, he remarks: ... [Man finds himself in a perilous situation. Why? Just because a third world war might break out unexpectedly and bring about the complete annihilation of humanity and the destruction of the earth? No. In this dawning atomic age a far greater danger threatens—precisely when the danger of a third world war has been removed. A strange assertion! Strange indeed, but only as long as we do not meditate. (G, 27/DT, 56). The thinker is menaced by a more radical threat, is endangered by a more radical explosiveness, let us say by a more essential bomb, capable of an emission (hinauswerfen) of such primordiality that the explosion (Explosion) of the atom bomb would be but its last ejection. Indeed, the point is even stronger: even a nuclear bomb, or a wholesale exchange of nuclear bombs between nuclear megapowers, which would put an end to "all life on earth," which would annihilate every living being, human and nonhuman, is a deriva­tive threat compared to this more primordial destructiveness. There is a pros­pect that is more dangerous and uncanny—unheimhcher—than the mere fact that everything could be blown apart (Auseinanderplatzen von allem). There is something that would bring about more homelessness, more not-being­at-home (un-Heimlich) than the destruction of cities and towns and of their inhabitants. What is truly unsettling, dis-placing (ent-setzen), the thing that is really terrifying (das Entsetzende), is not the prospect of the destruction of human life on the planet, of annihilating its places and its settlers. Further­more, this truly terrifying thing has already happened and has actually been around for quite some time. This more essential explosive has already been set off; things have already been destroyed, even though the nuclear holocaust has not yet happened. What then is the truly terrifying? The terrifying is that which sets everything that is outside (heraussitzl) of its own essence (Wesen)'. What is this dis-placing [Entsetzendel? It shows itself and conceals itself in the way in which everything presences (anwest), namely, in the fact that despite all conquest of distances the nearness of things remains absent. (VA, 165/P1.T, 166) The truly terrifying explosion, the more essential destruction is that which dis-places a thing from its Wesen, its essential nature, its ownmost coming to presence. The essential destruction occurs in the Being of a thing, not in its entitative actuality; it is a disaster that befalls Being, not beings. The destruc­tiveness of this more essential destruction is aimed not directly at man but at "things" (Dirge), in the distinctively Heideggerian sense. The Wesen of things is their nearness, and it is nearness which has been decimated by technological proximity and speed. Things have ceased to have true nearness and farness, have sunk into the indifference of that which, being a great distance away, can be brought close in the flash of a technological instant. Thereby, things have ceased to be things, have sunk into indifferent nothingness. Something profoundly disruptive has occurred on the level of the Being of things that has already destroyed them, already cast them out of (herauswerfen¬) their Being. Beings have been brought close to Us technologically; enor­mous distances are spanned in seconds. Satellite technology can make events occurring on the other side of the globe present in a flash; supersonic jets cross the great oceans in a few hours. Yet, far from bringing things "near," this massive technological removal of distance has actually abolished nearness, for nearness is precisely what withdraws in the midst of such technological frenzy. Nearness is the nearing of earth and heavens, mortals and gods, in the handmade jug, or the old bridge at Heidelberg, and it can be experienced only in the quiet meditativeness which renounces haste. Thus the real destruction of the thing, the one that abolishes its most essen­tial Being and Wesen, occurs when the scientific determination of things pre­vails and compels our assent. The thingliness of the jug is to serve as the place which gathers together the fruit of earth and sun in mortal offering to the gods above. But all that is destroyed when pouring this libation becomes instead the displacement of air by a liquid; at that moment science has suc­ceeded in reducing the jug-thing to a non-entity (Nichtige). Science, or rather the dominion of scientific representation, the rule of science over what comes to presence, what is called the Wesen, which is at work in science and technol­ogy, that is the truly explosive-destructive thing, the more essential dis-placing. The gathering of earth and sky, mortals and gods, that holds sway in the thing—for "gathering" is what the Old High German thing means—is scat­tered to the four winds, and that more essential annihilation occurs even if the bomb never goes off: Science's knowledge, which is compelling within its own sphere, the sphere of objects, already had annihilated things long before the atom bomb exploded. The bomb's explosion is only the grossest of all gross confirmations of the long-since accomplished annihilation of the thing. (VA, 168/PLT, 170J When things have been annihilated in their thingness, the mushroom clouds of the bomb cannot be far behind. So whether or not the bomb goes off is not essential, does not penetrate to the essence of what comes to presence in the present age of technological proximities and reduced distances. What is essential is the loss of genuine nearness, authentic and true nearness, following which the actual physical annihilation of planetary life would be a "gross" confirmation, an unrefined, external, physical destruction that would be but a follow-up, another afterthought, a less subtle counterpart to a more inward, profound, essential, authentic, ontological destruction.
  15. SkylrHarris917

    Opinion on these 2 Kritiks

    Can I get some opinions on running the False Heroism (Batman) and Death Cult K in the same 1NC?
  16. Pacifist

    Imperialism/Frontier K

    How is imperialism this year? Its an arg I've always wanted to run and go for, but I've never actually prepped it. I saw on open ev that frontier k is pretty much imperialism for oceans. The only thing I'm concerned about are links and relevant impacts to the aff, as the oceans seems pretty different for the lit since it usually occurred on land.
  17. Does anyone have a neoliberalism k specific to identity politics? Willing to trade pretty heavily. PM me for details
  18. KritikallySound

    Give back the land

    really interested in reading this, can someone hook a brutha up with some lit?
  19. Can someone please explain the K and how to run it? I have a bunch of the evidence and a general understanding of the cards, but how do I exactly run the K? Is there a performance? Any help is much appreciated!
  20. MichaelCeraKnockOff

    Biopower/Capitalism Heidegger Links?

    So basically, I'm looking for cards that link Bipower and Capitalism to a Heidegger Kritik. I know how they link but I'm lacking the cards and all my searches are leading to papers that I have to buy to see. Cites would be great, cards would be even better. Thanks.
  21. One of my debater buds told me it was severing out of the timeframe because they don't pass at the same time and also made the Alt and plan noncompetitive, but I wouldn't qualify him as a reliable source.
  22. iamanoob

    Nietzsche K

    How would I go about building a Nietzsche K for the Public Forum February topic? Any cards would be greatly appreciated.
  23. osahoniyamu

    Necropolitics File?

    Does anyone by any chance have a necropolitics file that they could kindly share?
  24. ConsultVerminSupreme

    Neg file vs Utopianism Aff

    Anyone have generic evidence for a Lacan Aff case centered on utopianism and embracing the real OR more specifically links to race arguements - Psychoanalysis is racist - Utopianism is good to interrogate race - Race causes utopianism Will trade heavily, message for requests Thanks
×