Re: topicality views

[Martin Che Harris <foren004@midget.towson.edu>]

Hmmm, topicality my favorite discussion (next to TD bashing :) ). I will 
say close but no cigar. I agree with most of what Jarvis says. The 
topicality argument still has a presumption level to prove its worth. If 
you lose the reasons why YOUR definition are good then all it means to me 
is I still do not know what the word means and therefore presume the aff. 
is not in violation. Inotherwords the indict of your definition takes out 
the warrant for your voting issue.
    It is the reverse of the porn test. I do not know what pollutant 
means but it is definitely NOT only carbon dioxide. Therefore you have not 
proven SO2 is not a pollutant.

Justice, Peace, and Love
Martin Che Harris, TSU Research Coordinator

"To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of people"

---

References:

• topicality views
• From: SEAN TIFFEE <Sean.Tiffee@house.state.tx.us>

---

• Prev by Date: Possible Jesuit Qualifiers
• Next by Date: FYI: American Airlines
• Prev by thread: Re: topicality views
• Next by thread: topicality views
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page