This is a mock-up round of a debate concerning the morning lectures that start at 9:00AM. It turns out ti be more of a kritik, talking about these lectures lead to boredom, boredom leads to people playing GTA during lectures, and how that leads to overall anarchy.
Duration : 0:9:27
This is the final round of the NFA LD Debate Cooperative summer program. On the Affirmative is Frank (Bambi) Murdoch of Western Kentucky. On the Negative is James (JimJam) Hilbert. The resolution for this year’s topic is-
Resolved: That the United States federal government should substantially reform transportation infrastructure.
This was the final round of competition, decided on a 7-2 decision… See the description on part 5 for results. Recorded on August 8, 2009
Duration : 0:3:43
Please i am so lost i have a competition soon and trying to write brief does anyone know the topic/resolve for UIL 2006-2007, and if you do can you please tell me and might drop me some pointers on case writing?
Write what you saw, heard, and felt.
The actions of corporations ought to be held to the same moral standards as the actions of individuals.
What do you think. Please be specific and detailed. If you have quotes, that would help a lot too.
Thanks
Being pro or con would help on building arguments.
It is impossible to hold corporations to the same standard as an individual because an individual makes their own decision on their own, however a corporation has descisions made by commitee. If it is decided that it is cheaper to pay the EPA fine than to properly dispose of chemicle waste, that was not a decision made by Bob in acounting, a group voted on taking that action. Where as if I decided to burn a bunch of tires in my back yard, that is all me and I would be facing the EPA fine myself.
A corporation is really an entity that you cannot take and throw in jail. Also you cannot distroy it because it has a role in the economy such as providing jobs. It looks really bad putting hundreds of people in a soup line because of a bad coporate decision. So the basic differences in how the law looks at corporations and individuals makes it so that a different moral measuring stick has to be used.
It is bad because corporations can activly break laws that would have people thrown in jail for. Such as Blackberry is stolen technology but they got away with it because so many people now depend on that technology to work (If I was judge I would have turned over control to the people it was stolen from, but alas it wasn’t up to me). The people who did it paid an ungodly fine but they still became mega rich by doing it. Now how doees morality play here. It was stolen but is also is not right for all the people who paid for their Blackberries to suffer and lose their phone who bought it through honest means. Which is why corporationsare different than individuals because to punish a corporation means that you can adversly effect people who had no clue that an illegal act was done.
So no, a corporation should not be held to the same standard as an individual.
I need some megga help on a criteria for neg. I am running stability as a value.Thanks soo much
I have a tournament tomorrow!!!!!!!!
that’s what happens when you keep on procrastinating.
well, i just need help in find a vaule and CR for the topic…for neg and aff…
im kind of new… something other them morality… if you dont mind can you give any ex, how it relates back to the topic…
ok, first, you have to let us know what the topic is. there is UIL, NFL, TFA… etc. also, some organizations change it every two, three months or each semester (UIL). send me an email and i’ll help you as much as possible. I’m debate the spring 2007 UIL LD topic.
if you just need a value and crit then you can go to debate forums and post there.
also type the resolution or key words of it in the yahoo search box. you might find some debate sites
hey i have to write a LD debate speech for school for both the aff and the neg. and i cant think of anything! here is the resolution: It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people! i really hope u guys can help..i am just so brain-dead!
hey actually just give me some negative information..
Affirmative: It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people.
Talk about how in situations like this, someone is going to die either way. Taking action by jeopardizing one person to save the rest is cutting down on losses. Through your actions someone has died, but through inaction many more could have died.
Negative: It is NOT morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people.
Talk about how it is not the average person’s decision whether another person lives or dies; that duty belongs to God, the judicial system, etc. Perhaps present the alternative of killing yourself to save innocent people, instead of killing another person- it’s one thing to make a choice about your own life, but another thing entirely to make a choice about someone else’s.
Hope this helps.
I really need help!
I signed up for debate this year and I am totally lost. Our teacher has required us to be in LD, even though I am more of an orator. I was assigned the Negative position of the resolution:
Resolved: It is morally permissable to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people.
I am so lost! I agree with the Affirmative side but I have to work on the negative. I need help writing my case, or if someone already has a case that I could work off of, because I have no idea what I am doing and I am totally stressed out since my typed case is due tomorrow!!!
HELP!!
lol i did LD for about a year…
Frist define all the words in the resolution. Then make up a criterior and a value criterion and 3 contentions. they dont have to be the best. if tehre jsut due tomm then just bs them. if you need more help tomm post another question and ill see if i can help u out.
my resolution is: it is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people can you help me with like definitions and criterion’s and points well arguments wit the whole think ill give 20 points for this help.
When I read the topic of your debate, my first thought was that your teacher should be slapped silly. I don’t see how you can research this topic in a reasonable amount of time. It has no key words. Debate topics such as "feminism", "capital punishment", "campaign finance", "right to bear arms", etc. work better because they have key words that pop up all over the place when you try to research the topic. But since you don’t have that kind of a topic you and your classmates will have to pull material for your debate out of your rear end.
Definitions should not be too difficult. Just use a Webster’s dictionary or credible online dictionary and no one will make too much of a stink over it.
Criteria for judging the debate is basically a measuring stick by which debate observers or judges decide who wins the debate. Your criteria could be "adherence to moral standards" or "lives saved". The important thing about criteria is you have to "sell" it to the judges. This means you explain why your criteria should be used for judging the debate and not whatever criteria your opposition thinks should be used.
As for points and arguments, these are the real problem you will have to deal with. You might be able to think of some but this won’t be an easy task. Just do the best you can with researching the topic and you should stumble across a few good arguments for your position.
Good luck!
ok so for some reason im blanking and im trying to write my case.. what is a criterion.? somebody help?
1 : a standard on which a judgment or decision may be based
2 : a characterizing mark or trait
synonyms see standard
usage The plural criteria has been used as a singular for over half a century <let me now return to the third criteria — R. M. Nixon> <that really is the criteria — Bert Lance>. Many of our examples, like the two foregoing, are taken from speech. But singular criteria is not uncommon in edited prose, and its use both in speech and writing seems to be increasing. Only time will tell whether it will reach the unquestioned acceptability of agenda.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criterion