Re: The Farce that rolled

[Sean Upton <Sean.Upton@m.cc.utah.edu>]

Terry Says:
>>>>
Josh is absolutely right in his post below.  As far as I can tell,
every blooming pro-CR topic poster has essentially the same political
view toward the topic:  affirmation of this topic will "enable" us
somehow to have a "real world" impact on discrimination.  While I
agree with that political view (that we should end discrimination),
I'd sure hate to coach or debate negative on it.
>>>>

Actually, we have made nonesuch argument (supposing that you mean
"affirmation" in a sense that affirmatives win).  We have argued that
merely DEBATING this topic will provide such advantages.  Also, I think
that Laura Heider's arguments concerning ground (See her first post - Josh
still hasn't responded), etc easily dismiss that negatives will be all
that much more difficult, if any.  If there's anyone who REALLY wants
decent gound division for the neg, it's Laura.  She's been through more
literature on this topic than 98 percent of the rest of us.  With those
two factors in mind, I'm willing to give more credence to her arguments
than those of CR detractors, most of whom have not done anything more than
skim the civil right literature. 

Sean
Utah Debate
Looking forward to negative debates on the CR topic

---

References:

• Re: The Farce that rolled
• From: "Terry West" <WEST@CENTRUM.CN.SUU.EDU>

---

• Prev by Date: Jazz: One slam dunk, three to go
• Next by Date: Re: The Farce that rolled
• Prev by thread: Re: The Farce that rolled
• Next by thread: Re: The Farce that rolled
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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