Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Nate Cohn
• AT: K
o K teams can win while not contesting the case
o K teams can only win if they render the aff irrelevant
Aff wins if aff is still relevant
o Can approach aff from numerous philosophical points
Explodes literature – difficult for aff to target
o How to think about kritiks
Consider them in terms of different approaches
K has to have a link
Think of Ks as the elements of the case that it kritiks
Undermine utility of ethics of aff plan
Criticize ability to predict the future, ideology, trying to change the world, etc.
Kritiks of fiat – normativity , k of power structures – Foucault, Agamben , k of cap
Reps K – contend something aff is engaged in
Structures plan relies on
o How Ks win
Alternative – solves/turns case, etc
Prima facie issue, ethical obligation – value to life
Role of ballot framework – weigh K first, don’t look at case
• X comes first arguments
o How aff wins
Defense of K thesis
Answers to alt
Answers to turns-case
Impact calc – consequentalism good, extinction o/w
Topic-specific kritiks become more relevant
o How to beat turns case
2 reasons k turns case
• Root cause
• Analytical DAs – K shows aff is not true – threats based off x school of thought
o Neg reexplains the affirmative using K ideology, shows how aff is wrong
Explain their reexplanation, show how aff solves
Know the K literature/language
Something else comes first
o The security dilemma
Each state fight for their own interests
Key realist assumption is that states are unitary and rational actors defined by their military
capabilities
o ontology – study of being, epistemology – study of how we gain knowledge
o Discourse – representations come first
Representations shape policy making
o Wendt – horrible book?
o Assumptions are presumably accurate – alt fails
o Bring back case, use it against the K
o
o
•
•