[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: Terry West debates out of a paper bag

> Both the aff and the neg Stannards would concede
> that the theoretical origin of fiat as the foundation
> of solvency (to overcome inherency) is indeed described
> by the following:
> 
> >>So, "fiat" was invoked to say that IF the government were to change
> >>in this desirable way, THEN the problem would be solved and the 
> >>advantages would acrue."
> >   
> This describes the structural logic of fiat.  It does not imply that
> one "fiats" solvency, but that fiat is a necessary precondition
> for a solvency debate to occur.  In the immortal words of my
> sister, "DUH!"
> 

And if Matt had only been his usually eloquent self :-) when FIRST 
posting his response. . .  Anyway, we're back to where we came in.  
I'm still waiting for someone to put that damn card in my hand (or on 
my computer) that says "soc. will solve the capitalist mindset" and 
have it be from a source that has some credibility to make that sort 
of EMPIRICALLY based claim.  My point (and it's not just about 
socialism, but virtually ANY utopian counterplan/plan, and several 
other arguments such as deep eco) is that if the source is a "true 
believer" making a philosophical/wishful prediction, that may have 
merit as a CRITIQUE of what the world OUGHT to look like (I've even 
voted for socialist critiques--even those run by CEU!!! :-)  ).  But 
if this source is making a prediction of an ADVANTAGE that will acrue 
(SOLVENCY) from a counterplan, we have to assess by what measure the 
source is likely to be correct.  And if I had been more eloquent in 
my original post, Matt would have probably agreed :-).  But then we 
wouldn't have had as much fun making the CEDA-L watch us make fun of 
each other, either.

> >>>>>
> >That sets up the following quarterfinal debate between Professor 
> >Stannard on the affirmative, and Professor Stannard on the negative, 
> >to be held in the De-Tox Room with the following panel. . .
> >>>>>
> I was hoping Terry would list the panel, but since he doesn't,
> We'll take Tuna, Bill Shanahan, Karl Marx, Emma Goldman
> and Bear (who will want to vote against Stannard, and realizing
> he cannot do so, will go into an endless logical loop and have
> to be rushed to the nearest neuropsychiatric clinic).

Well.  Haven't had Shanahan as a judge to my memory.  Nor Goldman.  
Pretty sure this Marx guy is dead (was he the one with the horn?)  
But that makes him more qualified than a couple of judges we had at 
CEDA nats last year. . .

Bear, of course, has been in an endless logical loop since I've known 
him, and will thus probably vote correctly and against the 
counterplan.  I'm striking the rest of Matt's panel, and perming the 
socialism counterplan with my own utopian plan which puts ME as 
Supreme Ruler of the Universe (which Matt never answered, by the way).

> 
> Sorry Terry, but you were placed on the strike list after
> we learned of the incident involving the paper bag, the
> fire hydrant, and the bottle of aftershave...
> :-}  :-}  :-}

I totally deny the involvement of any bottle of aftershave.

Terry West
Southern Utah

> >   
> matt stannard
> >the college of eastern utah
>
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page