Rethinking Bad - Dylan Scher A Interpretation Rethinking...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Dylan Scher A – Interpretation “Rethinking” alternatives should not be run B – Violation The alternative to his K is to “rethink” the resolution He tells us to go “rethink” C – Standards 1. Ground Skew . The K destroys affirmative ground because the negative doesn’t have to defend anything concrete, just rethinking, meaning that there is no negative world for me to indict, meaning they can kick out of anything they want. Furthermore they can shift there advocacy to avoid any turns I try to make by saying that they don’t have to defend those implications because they are just engaging in criticism, further destroying affirmative ground. Ground skew is unfair because the debater with limited ground is at a competitive disadvantage because it creates an unequal playing field and thus violates fairness. Ground skew is uneducational because it limits the arguments that each debater may inform participants and observers of and discourages extensive research on the topic. 2. Real Word Applicability . A. Comprehensive analysis of public policy is impossible.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 2

Rethinking Bad - Dylan Scher A Interpretation Rethinking...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online