8/12/2011. Facts (observations) compare with. some code (standard) resulting in a. Final Conclusion. Status Quo the existing state of things
|
|
- Bruce Osborne
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DEBATE ISSUES What is debate actually about? What is the terminology? How is it structured? FORENSIC REASONING Facts (observations) compare with some code (standard) resulting in a Final Conclusion DEFINITIONS Status Quo the existing state of things Negative (Opposition) Supports the status quo Affirmative (Government) advocates a change in the status quo 1
2 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS Presumption it is presumed that we will continue the way we are heading unless we get a good reason to change The Burden of Proof the requirement to overcome presumption a burden of proof you have the burden to prove your argument Burden of Rejoinder you have the burden to respond to your opponent s arguments not just advance your own Proposition/Resolution what is being debated Prima facie case a case that, prior to debate, provides sufficient reason to uphold the resolution PROPOSITIONS/RESOLUTIONS/STATEMENTS Questions of Fact True or False? Questions of Value Good or Bad? Questions of Policy What to do? STOCK ISSUES IN A POLICY DEBATE Significance Harms Inherency Problem Cause ILL BLAME Topicality Solvency Fairness Solution CURE/ COST/BENEFITS IMPORTANT: The Affirmative must win ALL stock issues to win the debate; Negative only has to win ONE. 2
3 CASE VS. PLAN Case: The reason we need a change Here s what we are discussing (Resolution and Definitions), which is what we agreed upon prior to the debate (topicality) We contend that there is a Problem (Harm) that is Significant enough to be addressed, it s Inherent in the Status Quo so it won t go away by itself Plan: Here s how we will solve the we identified in the case Here s the plan Here s support that it will solve the Here are additional benefits that will occur because of this plan EXAMPLE: SCHOOL BOND Case: Harm: Children aren t graduating with the education we think they need. Significance: Test scores are low for large numbers of students; affects all or most schools. Inherency: The reason is that the school districts don t have enough money Not enough teachers, materials, etc. Facilities are inadequate and need repair Plan: Details: Tax residents, build more schools; lower time needed to become a teacher Solvency: Research shows that more schools, more teachers mean students learn more TOPICALITY Primarily used in academic debate Discusses whether the Affirmative has been fair to the Negative Is the Affirmative s case topical? Does it adhere to the stated topic of the debate? CASE 3
4 CASE THE PROBLEM: HARMS & SIGNIFICANCE Harm: Is there really a (harm) that needs to be addressed (cured)? Significance: Assuming there is a harm, how bad is it? Quantitative significance give me numbers Qualitative significance INHERENCY Where does the lie? What is the cause? What is producing the harm? The exists because of WHAT? Structural Inherency Attitudinal inherency Existential inherency CASE PLAN (OF ACTION) How will we solve the s identified in the case? Planks: Agency: Who will oversee the plan to make sure it works? Mandates: What, specifically, will the plan do? Pass a law that XXX? (What will be mandated?) Enforcement: What will happen if the plan is not followed? Funding/Staffing: Where will the money/staff come from? PLAN 4
5 PLAN ADVANTAGES (PLAN EFFECTS) What are the benefits of adopting the plan? What proof can be provided to show that it will solve the? (Does the Plan meet the Advantages?) Are there any additional advantages of adopting the plan? ( subsidiary effects ) Note: Lack of any additional advantages to the Affirmative plan does not equate to the Affirmative not meeting its prima facie burden. ALTERNATIVE FORMATS FOR ARGUING POLICIES Comparative Advantages Case Develops the position that in comparison with the current system, the proposed system has more benefits STRATEGIES FOR REFUTING POLICY ARGUMENTS DEFENSE OF THE PRESENT POLICY SYSTEM: We can choose either the proposed new policy or the present policy, and the present system is better than the proposed change MINOR REPAIR: Status quo can be fixed with minor repairs; admits that there may be some s with the status quo, but a minor repair could mitigate the harms STRAIGHT REFUTATION: Defeat Affirmative arguments; show, through use of evidence and reasoning, that the affirmative is unable to meet the burden of proof on the issues, is non-topical, or just wrong COUNTER PLAN: We ve got a better idea (but must be non-topical in academic debate) NEGATIVE 5
6 DEFENSE OF PRESENT POLICY The (Alleged) Problem does not exist is insignificant is declining over time is the lesser of two evils (Aff plan) (value comparison test) The Present System is solving the can solve the, given sufficient time solves the most important (given that the SQ is the lesser of two evils) has philosophically sound principles The Proposed Plan (Aff) will not solve the (alleged) is (will be) not as effective as the present system has more (significant) than advantages does not have as many benefits as the present policy and, in fact, has more REPAIR OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM The Problem exists, although it is not as serious as is claimed The Present System is not the cause of the can be fixed with minor repairs The Proposed Plan (Aff) will not solve the (alleged) is (will be) not as effective as the present system, when repaired has more (significant) than advantages does not have as many benefits as the present policy and, in fact, has more STRAIGHT REFUTATION The Problem has not been proven (evidence/reasoning is flawed, untrustworthy, non existent) harmful The Present System the cause of the or has not been proven to be incapable of removing the causes is not the only cause of the The Proposed Plan (Aff) has not been proven to solve the or produce the advantage(s) workable or enforceable has not proven that the advantages will outweigh the 6
7 COUNTERPROPOSAL The Problem has not been proven (evidence/reasoning is flawed, untrustworthy, non existent) harmful The Present System the cause of the or has not been proven to be incapable of removing the causes is not the only cause of the The Proposed Plan (Aff) has not been proven to solve the or produce the advantage(s) workable or enforceable has not proven that the advantages will outweigh the 7
AFFIRMATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich
AFFIRMATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich The FIRST STEP in your position as the Affirmative Team is to develop a PROPOSITION, or a statement that is open to interpretation by both teams; it will serve
More informationDebate Vocabulary 203 terms by mdhamilton25
Debate Vocabulary 203 terms by mdhamilton25 Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Accident Adapting Ad hominem attack (Attack on the person) Advantage Affirmative
More informationNEGATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich
NEGATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich The FIRST STEP in your position as the Negative Team is to analyze the PROPOSITION proposed by the Affirmative Team, since this statement is open to interpretation
More informationOpposition Strategy. NCFA Rookie Debate Camp
Opposition Strategy NCFA Rookie Debate Camp Agenda A Brief Word on Trichotomy Basic Path to Winning Opposition Strategies by Position* Quick Overview of Refutation Strength Specific OPP Arguments Activity
More informationCorporate Team Training Session # 2 May 30 / June 1
5 th Annual Great Corporate Debate Corporate Team Training Session # 2 May 30 / June 1 Stephen Buchanan Education Consulting Outline of Session # 2 Great Corporate Debate Review Contest, Rules, Judges
More informationCorporate Team Training Session # 2 June 8 / 10
3 rd Annual Great Corporate Debate Corporate Team Training Session # 2 June 8 / 10 Stephen Buchanan Education Consulting Outline of Session # 2 Persuasion topics Great Corporate Debate Review Contest,
More informationToastmasters International Debate Organizer (Summarized)
General Information Toastmasters International Debate Organizer (Summarized) Location: Date/Format: Resolved: Judge 1: Judge 3: Judge 2: Judge 4(?): Affirmative Speaker 1: Negative Speaker 1: Affirmative
More informationDEBATE HANDBOOK. Paul Hunsinger, Ph.D. Chairman of Speech Department. Alan Price, M.A. Assistant Director of Debate
DEBATE HANDBOOK DEBATE HANDBOOK Paul Hunsinger, Ph.D. Chairman of Speech Department Alan Price, M.A. Assistant Director of Debate Roy Wood, Ph.D. Director of Forensics Printed with permission of the copyright
More informationJUDGING Policy Debate
JUDGING Policy Debate Table of Contents Overview... 2 Round Structure... 3 Parts of an Argument... 4 How to Determine the Winner... 5 What to Do After the Round... 6 Sample Ballot... 7 Sample Flow Sheet...
More informationFigures removed due to copyright restrictions.
Lincoln/Douglas Debate Figures removed due to copyright restrictions. Debating is like Fencing Thrust Making assertions backed by evidence Parry R f Refuting opponents assertions Burden of Proof In a formal
More information1) What is the universal structure of a topicality violation in the 1NC, shell version?
Varsity Debate Coaching Training Course ASSESSMENT: KEY Name: A) Interpretation (or Definition) B) Violation C) Standards D) Voting Issue School: 1) What is the universal structure of a topicality violation
More information2013 IDEA Global Youth Forum in Ireland
2013 IDEA Global Youth Forum in Ireland Coaches and Judges Track Participant packet August 13 th 26 th Ireland, Galway Curriculum Prepared by: Lazar Pop Ivanov Mark Woosley Dovile Venskutonyte Sergei Naumoff
More informationThe Disadvantage Uniqueness: Link:
The Disadvantage When you think about debating the opposing viewpoint of any situation what comes to mind? Whether you are debating Twinkies versus Ding Dongs or if national missile defense is a good idea,
More informationThe Code of the Debater
The Code of the Debater The Code of the Debater Introduction to Policy Debating Alfred C. Snider International Debate Education Association New York Amsterdam Brussels International Debate Education Association
More informationIII. RULES OF POLICY (TEAM) DEBATE. A. General
III. RULES OF POLICY (TEAM) DEBATE A. General 1. All debates must be based on the current National High School Debate resolution chosen under the auspices of the National Topic Selection Committee of the
More informationToday s Lecture. Preliminary comments on the Problem of Evil J.L Mackie
Today s Lecture Preliminary comments on the Problem of Evil J.L Mackie Preliminary comments: A problem with evil The Problem of Evil traditionally understood must presume some or all of the following:
More informationOverview: Application: What to Avoid:
UNIT 3: BUILDING A BASIC ARGUMENT While "argument" has a number of different meanings, college-level arguments typically involve a few fundamental pieces that work together to construct an intelligent,
More informationWhat is Debate? Debating vs. Arguing. Formal Debate vs. Informal Debate
What is Debate? Debating vs. Arguing Formal Debate vs. Informal Debate What is Debate? Formal debates are structured exchanges of ideas which adhere to pre-determined rules intended to be fair. Different
More informationThe Many Problems of Memory Knowledge (Short Version)
The Many Problems of Memory Knowledge (Short Version) Prepared For: The 13 th Annual Jakobsen Conference Abstract: Michael Huemer attempts to answer the question of when S remembers that P, what kind of
More informationAuthor Adam F. Nelson, J.D. 1
TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE THEORY OF LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE Author Adam F. Nelson, J.D. 1 This article is an attempt to open a dialogue within our community about how best to resolve these issues, by offering
More informationTeaching Debate in Japan 日本におけるディベート教育
教育実践学研究 21,2016 79 Part Five Debating the Negative 日本におけるディベート教育 第五部否定側ディベート Paul KLOUSIA * NAGASE Yoshiki ** ポール クラウジア 長瀬慶來 ABSTRACT : Debating the negative side of the topic requires the student to understand
More informationAn Introduction to Parliamentary Debate
What is Parliamentary Debate? At the most basic level, Parli is a form of debate in which you and a partner from your own team debate 2 people from another team. You are debating to support or oppose a
More informationSaul Kripke, Naming and Necessity
24.09x Minds and Machines Saul Kripke, Naming and Necessity Excerpt from Saul Kripke, Naming and Necessity (Harvard, 1980). Identity theorists have been concerned with several distinct types of identifications:
More informationUrban Debate League ft. MC H. Kissinger: International Relations
Urban Debate League ft. MC H. Kissinger: International Relations with a general focus on getting novices up to speed and reviewing fundamentals for everyone else (with a total lack of focus on concise
More informationMPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic
MPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic Making and Refuting Arguments Steps of an Argument You make a claim The conclusion of your
More informationChapter 2 Normative Theories of Ethics
Chapter 2 Normative Theories of Ethics MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. Consequentialism a. is best represented by Ross's theory of ethics. b. states that sometimes the consequences of our actions can be morally relevant.
More informationPower Match opponent has the same win/loss record as you
LD Basics Terms to know 1. Value Foundation for your case Clash of value and support of value is imperative to your case. Ex. Morality, justice, freedom of speech 2. Criterion- Supporting thesis statement
More informationDisvalue in nature and intervention *
Disvalue in nature and intervention * Oscar Horta University of Santiago de Compostela THE FOX, THE RABBIT AND THE VEGAN FOOD RATIONS Consider the following thought experiment. Suppose there is a rabbit
More informationCOACHING THE BASICS: WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
COACHING THE BASICS: WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT? Some people think that engaging in argument means being mad at someone. That s one use of the word argument. In debate we use a far different meaning of the term.
More informationDebating International Relations
Debating International Relations Brandon Merrell University of California, San Diego I. Preface 2 II. Introduction and First Principles 3 Why Debate? 3 Important Terms and Common Questions 3 Structure
More informationNo Love for Singer: The Inability of Preference Utilitarianism to Justify Partial Relationships
No Love for Singer: The Inability of Preference Utilitarianism to Justify Partial Relationships In his book Practical Ethics, Peter Singer advocates preference utilitarianism, which holds that the right
More informationStatement. Assertion. Elaboration. Reasoning. Argument Building. Statement / Assertion
Argument Building Statement Assertion Elaboration Reasoning Example Example Statement / Assertion Is the title/ lable of your argument. It should be precise and easy to understand. Better assertions help
More informationBasics of Ethics CS 215 Denbigh Starkey
Basics of Ethics CS 215 Denbigh Starkey 1. Introduction 1 2. Morality vs. ethics 1 3. Some ethical theories 3 a. Subjective relativism 3 b. Cultural relativism 3 c. Divine command theory 3 d. The golden
More informationCODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT FOR CHURCH PERSONNEL
CODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT FOR CHURCH PERSONNEL June 2016 Table of Contents I. Preamble 2 II. Responsibility 3 III. Pastoral Standards 3 1. Conduct for Pastoral Counselors and Spiritual Directors 3 2. Confidentiality
More informationBuilding Your Framework everydaydebate.blogspot.com by James M. Kellams
Building Your Framework everydaydebate.blogspot.com by James M. Kellams The Judge's Weighing Mechanism Very simply put, a framework in academic debate is the set of standards the judge will use to evaluate
More informationContent Area Variations of Academic Language
Academic Expressions for Interpreting in Language Arts 1. It really means because 2. The is a metaphor for 3. It wasn t literal; that s the author s way of describing how 4. The author was trying to teach
More informationOSSA Conference Archive OSSA 3
University of Windsor Scholarship at UWindsor OSSA Conference Archive OSSA 3 May 15th, 9:00 AM - May 17th, 5:00 PM Commentary on Schwed Lawrence Powers Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive
More informationThe Churches and the Public Schools at the Close of the Twentieth Century
The Churches and the Public Schools at the Close of the Twentieth Century A Policy Statement of the National Council of the Churches of Christ Adopted November 11, 1999 Table of Contents Historic Support
More informationResolved: The United States should adopt a no first strike policy for cyber warfare.
A Coach s Notes 1 Everett Rutan Xavier High School ejrutan3@ctdebate.org or ejrutan3@acm.org Connecticut Debate Association Amity High School and New Canaan High School November 17, 2012 Resolved: The
More informationCHRISTIAN COMMUNICATORS OF OHIO SPEECH AND DEBATE PROGRAM
CHRISTIAN COMMUNICATORS OF OHIO SPEECH AND DEBATE PROGRAM There are a variety of competitive speech and debate programs in which young people may participate. While the programs may have some similarities,
More informationteachers guide to policy debate
teachers guide to policy debate 2 nd Edition By: Sophie Elsner & Matt Grimes A project of the Rhode Island Urban Debate League and the Swearer Center for Public Service at Brown University This work is
More informationALARA: A Complex Approach Based on Multi-disciplinary Perspectives
ALARA: A Complex Approach Based on Multi-disciplinary Perspectives Presented by Ludo Veuchelen SCK CEN Based on a working paper coauthored by Suman Rao Outline Introduction ALARA: a complex concept Philosophy
More informationINTERPERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS
Page1 Lesson 4-2 FACTORS THAT REDUCE INTERPERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS Page2 Ask Yourself: FACTORS THAT REDUCE INTERPERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS * What is it that gets in the way of me getting what I want and need?
More informationfoundationalism and coherentism are responses to it. I will then prove that, although
1 In this paper I will explain what the Agrippan Trilemma is and explain they ways that foundationalism and coherentism are responses to it. I will then prove that, although foundationalism and coherentism
More informationKevin Liu 21W.747 Prof. Aden Evens A1D. Truth and Rhetorical Effectiveness
Kevin Liu 21W.747 Prof. Aden Evens A1D Truth and Rhetorical Effectiveness A speaker has two fundamental objectives. The first is to get an intended message across to an audience. Using the art of rhetoric,
More informationThe Clock without a Maker
The Clock without a Maker There are a many great questions in life in which people have asked themselves. Who are we? What is the meaning of life? Where do come from? This paper will be undertaking the
More informationClaim Types C L A S S L E C T U R E N O T E S Identifying Types of Claims in Your Papers
Claim Types C L A S S L E C T U R E N O T E S Identifying Types of in Your Papers Background: Models of Argument Most textbooks for College Composition devote a chapter to the Classical Model of argument
More informationDIOCESE OF PALM BEACH CODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT FOR CHURCH PERSONNEL
DIOCESE OF PALM BEACH CODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT FOR CHURCH PERSONNEL Table of Contents I. Preamble 2 II. Responsibility 3 III. Pastoral Standards 3 1. Conduct for Pastoral Counselors and Spiritual Directors
More informationGale on a Pragmatic Argument for Religious Belief
Volume 6, Number 1 Gale on a Pragmatic Argument for Religious Belief by Philip L. Quinn Abstract: This paper is a study of a pragmatic argument for belief in the existence of God constructed and criticized
More informationPlantinga, Pluralism and Justified Religious Belief
Plantinga, Pluralism and Justified Religious Belief David Basinger (5850 total words in this text) (705 reads) According to Alvin Plantinga, it has been widely held since the Enlightenment that if theistic
More informationComputer Ethics. Normative Ethics and Normative Argumentation. Viola Schiaffonati October 10 th 2017
Normative Ethics and Normative Argumentation Viola Schiaffonati October 10 th 2017 Overview (van de Poel and Royakkers 2011) 2 Some essential concepts Ethical theories Relativism and absolutism Consequentialist
More informationAn Atheological Apologetic
Illinois Wesleyan University Digital Commons @ IWU Honors Projects Philosophy 1991 An Atheological Apologetic Joyce A. Lazier '91 Illinois Wesleyan University Recommended Citation Lazier '91, Joyce A.,
More informationAssessment task. Task details. Content description. Year level 7. Civics and Citizenship
Assessment task Year level 7 Learning area Subject Title of task Task details Description of task Type of assessment Purpose of assessment Assessment strategy Evidence to be collected Suggested time Content
More informationHebrews 7:4-19. Side by Side comparison. I. Introduction Having just given the reader in the first three verses of chapter 7 five positive differences
I. Introduction II. Vs. 4-10 Three proofs III. Vs. 11-19 Three arguments Hebrews 7:4-19 Side by Side comparison I. Introduction Having just given the reader in the first three verses of chapter 7 five
More informationRomans. The Transforming Power of the Righteousness of God Romans 7:13-25
Romans The Transforming Power of the Righteousness of God Romans 7:13-25 Talk about it ntroduction Why do we study the Bible? Not information but transformation To get to know God better To understand
More informationIf Everyone Does It, Then You Can Too Charlie Melman
27 If Everyone Does It, Then You Can Too Charlie Melman Abstract: I argue that the But Everyone Does That (BEDT) defense can have significant exculpatory force in a legal sense, but not a moral sense.
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Ethics
Philosophy 1100: Ethics Topic 8: Double Effect, Doing-Allowing, and the Trolley Problem: 1. Two Distinctions Common in Deontology 2. The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) 3. Why believe DDE? 4. The Doctrine
More informationEverything s An Argument. Chapter 1: Everything Is an Argument
Everything s An Argument Chapter 1: Everything Is an Argument Arguments to Inform Convince Explore Make Decisions Meditate/Pray Arguments to INFORM Presenting specific information to inform readers Example:
More informationDoes the Skeptic Win? A Defense of Moore. I. Moorean Methodology. In A Proof of the External World, Moore argues as follows:
Does the Skeptic Win? A Defense of Moore I argue that Moore s famous response to the skeptic should be accepted even by the skeptic. My paper has three main stages. First, I will briefly outline G. E.
More informationJustice and Ethics. Jimmy Rising. October 3, 2002
Justice and Ethics Jimmy Rising October 3, 2002 There are three points of confusion on the distinction between ethics and justice in John Stuart Mill s essay On the Liberty of Thought and Discussion, from
More informationTRENDS IN LD DEBATE UIL Capital Conference July 7, :00-4:00
1 of 16 13-Dec-09 7:51 PM TRENDS IN LD DEBATE UIL Capital Conference July 7, 2007 3:00-4:00 Tim Cook Salado High School Extemp Topic Analysis Texas Speech and Debate Camp UIL State LD Advisory Committee
More informationTempted, Yet without Sin Matthew 4:1-11 January 21, 2018
Tempted, Yet without Sin Matthew 4:1-11 January 21, 2018 It would be difficult to overstate how absolutely essential this passage about the temptation of Christ is. The whole plan of redemption hangs on
More informationSocratic and Platonic Ethics
Socratic and Platonic Ethics G. J. Mattey Winter, 2017 / Philosophy 1 Ethics and Political Philosophy The first part of the course is a brief survey of important texts in the history of ethics and political
More informationUNITY. (Power in the Body of Christ)
UNITY (Power in the Body of Christ) "I am praying not only for these disciples but also for all who will ever believe in me because of their testimony. My prayer for all of them is that they will be one,
More informationMoral Theory. What makes things right or wrong?
Moral Theory What makes things right or wrong? Consider: Moral Disagreement We have disagreements about right and wrong, about how people ought or ought not act. When we do, we (sometimes!) reason with
More informationTo what extent should we embrace the ideological perspective(s) reflected in the source?
Social Studies -1 Major Writing Assignment The purpose of the major writing assignment in Social Studies is to assess student ability and skill of interpretation and argumentation when presented with a
More informationGMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT
GMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT 30-minute Argument Essay SKILLS TESTED Your ability to articulate complex ideas clearly and effectively Your ability to examine claims and accompanying evidence Your
More informationRULES FOR DISCUSSION STYLE DEBATE
RULES FOR DISCUSSION STYLE DEBATE Junior High Discussion (2 Person Teams) Beginner Level Open Level 1 st Affirmative Constructive 5 min 6 min 1 st Negative Constructive 5 min 6 min 2 nd Affirmative Constructive
More informationSwinburne: The Problem of Evil
Swinburne: The Problem of Evil THE PROBLEM: The Problem of Evil: An all-powerful being would be able to prevent evil from happening in the world. An all-good being would want to prevent evil from happening
More informationThe Power of a Peaceful Mind: Let Go of Judgment and Let In Joy
As a transformational life coach who has supported clients in all aspects of creating lives they love, and as someone deeply committed to living an awake and inspired life myself, I have seen time and
More informationEthical Egoism. Ethics Unit 5
Ethical Egoism Ethics Unit 5 The primacy of Self Interest in the Western tradition A. The individual exists prior to society - society does not construct the individual Hobbes Hereby it is manifest that
More informationAnswering Common Objections To Christianity John Kelsey
Answering Common Objections To Christianity John Kelsey Six Major Objections: 1. Is there a God'? 2. Is the Bible true? 3. What about evil? 4. Is Jesus the only way? 5. What about the unevangelized? 6.
More informationWarren. Warren s Strategy. Inherent Value. Strong Animal Rights. Strategy is to argue that Regan s strong animals rights position is not persuasive
Warren Warren s Strategy A Critique of Regan s Animal Rights Theory Strategy is to argue that Regan s strong animals rights position is not persuasive She argues that one ought to accept a weak animal
More informationHuemer s Problem of Memory Knowledge
Huemer s Problem of Memory Knowledge ABSTRACT: When S seems to remember that P, what kind of justification does S have for believing that P? In "The Problem of Memory Knowledge." Michael Huemer offers
More informationResolved: Connecticut should eliminate the death penalty.
A Coach s Notes 1 Everett Rutan Xavier High School everett.rutan@moodys.com or ejrutan3@acm.org Connecticut Debate Association AITE October 15, 2011 Resolved: Connecticut should eliminate the death penalty.
More informationUnderstanding The Cay Theme Adulthood
Theme Adulthood The dangerous journey that Phillip takes is symbolic of his journey from boyhood to manhood, with all of its fears, traps, challenges, and surprises. Like Phillip s journey, the adventure
More informationI John 5 Handout 1st Birthmark is Love. Verse 1-2 What is it? Who are we talking about here? Verse 2 - How do we know we love the children of God?
I John 5 Handout Last week Jerri took us through chapter 4. We learned that there are two spirits in the world: spirit of truth and spirit of error. John warned his readers against false teachers, and
More informationCHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument
CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument General Overview: As our students often attest, we all live in a complex world filled with demanding issues and bewildering challenges. In order to determine those
More informationLiving with Dying: Guided by the Truth (Student Guide)
Living with Dying: Guided by the Truth (Student Guide) We all live with dying. We all live in a dying, sin-broken world and in dying sinbroken bodies. Unless the Lord returns, we will all receive those
More informationThe Cosmological Argument
The Cosmological Argument Reading Questions The Cosmological Argument: Elementary Version The Cosmological Argument: Intermediate Version The Cosmological Argument: Advanced Version Summary of the Cosmological
More informationGMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT
GMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT 30- minute Argument Essay SKILLS TESTED Your ability to articulate complex ideas clearly and effectively Your ability to examine claims and accompanying evidence Your
More informationThe Epistles of John. Week 15: Introduction to 1 John
The Epistles of John Week 15: Introduction to 1 John Introduction to 1 John Things to discuss: Author Date Themes/Purpose Relationship to 2 John and 3 John Relationship to the Gospel of John Genre and
More informationETHICS IN ENGINEERING. Lecture 2/4
ETHICS IN ENGINEERING Lecture 2/4 REVIEW OF TOPIC FROM LECTURE 1 You are an employer at a large multinational software firm. You put an ad on Monster.com for software engineers to design a new product.
More informationLECTURE NINE EXISTENTIALISM EXISTENCE & ESSENCE SARTRE
LECTURE NINE SARTRE EXISTENTIALISM Jean-Paul Sartre (1905 1980) Presents a view of what makes human beings unique We are beings for which existence precedes essence This makes us different from the rest
More information4-Point Argumentative Performance Task Writing Rubric (Grades 6 11) SCORE 4 POINTS 3 POINTS 2 POINTS 1 POINT NS
Argumentative Performance Task Focus Standards Grade 8: W.8.5; L.8.1; L.8.2 4-Point Argumentative Performance Task Writing Rubric (Grades 6 11) SCORE 4 POINTS 3 POINTS 2 POINTS 1 POINT NS ORGANIZATION
More informationRethinking Development: the Centrality of Human Rights
Annabelle Wong Conflicting sentiments regarding the idea of development reflect the controversial aspects of development practices such as sweatshop labor and human trafficking. Development is commonly
More informationReading and Evaluating Arguments
Reading and Evaluating Arguments Learning Objectives: To recognize the elements of an argument To recognize types of arguments To evaluate arguments To recognize errors in logical reasoning An argument
More information1 Ted Kirnbauer Acts 6:1-15 4/19/15
1 Acts chapters 6 to 9 form a new section in the book. "The first five chapters of Acts have seen the establishment of the church in Jerusalem and the beginnings of opposition to it because of its preaching
More informationProcess Thought & Process Theism. By Fr. Charles Allen, Ph.D.
Process Thought & Process Theism By Fr. Charles Allen, Ph.D. What is process thought? It s a broad, mostly American philosophy of nature. It views the everyday world as fundamentally interactive, not inert
More informationSolving the Puzzle of Affirmative Action Jene Mappelerien
Solving the Puzzle of Affirmative Action Jene Mappelerien Imagine that you are working on a puzzle, and another person is working on their own duplicate puzzle. Whoever finishes first stands to gain a
More informationBURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTION IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE: A CALL FOR REFORM
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTION IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE: A CALL FOR REFORM by Minh A. Luong The lack of presumption and burden of proof standards in high school Lincoln-Douglas debate continues to be
More informationScientific Progress, Verisimilitude, and Evidence
L&PS Logic and Philosophy of Science Vol. IX, No. 1, 2011, pp. 561-567 Scientific Progress, Verisimilitude, and Evidence Luca Tambolo Department of Philosophy, University of Trieste e-mail: l_tambolo@hotmail.com
More informationA Framework for the Good
A Framework for the Good Kevin Kinghorn University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana Introduction The broad goals of this book are twofold. First, the book offers an analysis of the good : the meaning
More informationRealism and the success of science argument. Leplin:
Realism and the success of science argument Leplin: 1) Realism is the default position. 2) The arguments for anti-realism are indecisive. In particular, antirealism offers no serious rival to realism in
More informationIN DEFENSE OF AN ANIMAL S RIGHT TO LIFE. Aaron Simmons. A Dissertation
IN DEFENSE OF AN ANIMAL S RIGHT TO LIFE Aaron Simmons A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR
More informationUnderstanding The Contender Structure Conflict
Structure Conflict The Contender captures Alfred Brooks at a crucial time in his life. He has dropped out of school and is barely getting by working in a grocery store. His future looks quite bleak because
More informationCS305 Topic Introduction to Ethics
CS305 Topic Introduction to Ethics Sources: Baase: A Gift of Fire and Quinn: Ethics for the Information Age CS305-Spring 2010 Ethics 1 What is Ethics? A branch of philosophy that studies priciples relating
More informationSYLLOGISMS with examples and exercises
SYLLOGISMS with examples and exercises Extracted from the presentation by Emily Hsu Mind and Cognition part1:awarenesses and Knowers for the Basic Programs at Tse Chen Ling and Gyalwa Gyatso Buddhist Center
More informationCreating A Troop Agreement Troops and Parents
Creating A Troop Agreement Troops and Parents Objective To provide a better understanding of the benefits and importance of Team Agreements, and to provide examples and ideas. Length 15-20 minutes Materials
More information2 FREE CHOICE The heretical thesis of Hobbes is the orthodox position today. So much is this the case that most of the contemporary literature
Introduction The philosophical controversy about free will and determinism is perennial. Like many perennial controversies, this one involves a tangle of distinct but closely related issues. Thus, the
More information