Content-Manager, Administrators
203
edits
Difference between revisions of "Prospect ST (Sophia Tian)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
CheeseMeese (talk | contribs) (→ACs) |
CheeseMeese (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I get some questions asking me how I did phil debate as a small school, so I thought I'd answer them here. | I get some questions asking me how I did phil debate as a small school, so I thought I'd answer them here. | ||
== Debate == | |||
==== Phil Debate on the West Coast ==== | ==== Phil Debate on the West Coast ==== | ||
Silly rabbit, trix are for kids! | Silly rabbit, trix are for kids! | ||
| Line 16: | Line 19: | ||
I'll probably write a full length article on how to "do" phil debate soon, but it's always good to know the philosophy well enough to explain to a layperson. Using examples, numbering your arguments/signposting, and seeming knowledgeable always gives you a speaks boost. For example, if your opponent says "Freedom is not uniform, meaning Kant can't account for it under his a priori binary" a good response could be "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori," but the best response would be something like "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori e.g., saying a triangle has 3 sides is an a priori truth, but there are many different types of triangles -- scalene, isosceles, and equilateral even though they share the same property." While the second response is longer, it's also more detailed and explains the concept a lot better than the first. Longer responses are also not uniformly bad -- they give your judge time to flow, which can be a breath of fresh air in blippy phil debates. | I'll probably write a full length article on how to "do" phil debate soon, but it's always good to know the philosophy well enough to explain to a layperson. Using examples, numbering your arguments/signposting, and seeming knowledgeable always gives you a speaks boost. For example, if your opponent says "Freedom is not uniform, meaning Kant can't account for it under his a priori binary" a good response could be "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori," but the best response would be something like "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori e.g., saying a triangle has 3 sides is an a priori truth, but there are many different types of triangles -- scalene, isosceles, and equilateral even though they share the same property." While the second response is longer, it's also more detailed and explains the concept a lot better than the first. Longer responses are also not uniformly bad -- they give your judge time to flow, which can be a breath of fresh air in blippy phil debates. | ||
==== Small School Debate ==== | ==== Small School Debate ==== | ||
(This is the part where I do some shameless advertising) | (This is the part where I do some shameless advertising) | ||
| Line 23: | Line 25: | ||
Wiki stalking is going to be your best friend, especially if you don't do policy -- phil and K links can be easily acquired and used whenever you want as long as you're not at the first tournament of the topic. | Wiki stalking is going to be your best friend, especially if you don't do policy -- phil and K links can be easily acquired and used whenever you want as long as you're not at the first tournament of the topic. | ||
== Docs == | |||
=== 2022 -- 2023 === | === 2022 -- 2023 === | ||
==== January/February ==== | ==== January/February ==== | ||
===== ACs ===== | ===== ACs ===== | ||
I mostly read Kant with an ASEAN advantage, but in more tricky rounds I'd just fill the aff with preempts (theory or AT: K) instead of the util advantage. I kept the Kant framework and advantage relatively short (< 3:00) since most people don't LBL the justifications anyway, so it wasted time in the aff that I could use to add other more strategic preempts. The one below is the longer Kant framework by itself with all the carded preempts I'd put in the framework. | I mostly read Kant with an ASEAN advantage, but in more tricky rounds I'd just fill the aff with preempts (theory or AT: K) instead of the util advantage. I kept the Kant framework and advantage relatively short (< 3:00) since most people don't LBL the justifications anyway, so it wasted time in the aff that I could use to add other more strategic preempts. The one below is the longer Kant framework by itself with all the carded preempts I'd put in the framework. | ||
[[:File:Prospect ST JF23 Kant AC.docx|JF23 -- Kant AC]] | [[:File:Prospect ST JF23 Kant AC.docx|JF23 -- Kant AC]] | ||
[[:File:Prospect ST - JF23 Kant AC Frontlines.docx|JF23 -- Kant AC Frontlines]] | [[:File:Prospect ST - JF23 Kant AC Frontlines.docx|JF23 -- Kant AC Frontlines]] | ||
My pride and joy: | My pride and joy: | ||
[[:File:Prospect ST - JF23 - Kritikal Kantsequentialism AC.docx|JF23 -- Kritikal Kantsequentialism AC]] | [[:File:Prospect ST - JF23 - Kritikal Kantsequentialism AC.docx|JF23 -- Kritikal Kantsequentialism AC]] | ||
===== NCs ===== | ===== NCs ===== | ||
Read this NC mostly to get high speaks in front of judges that disliked skepticism. I'd usually run skep whenever I could though since the topic wasn't very balanced philosophy-wise. | Read this NC mostly to get high speaks in front of judges that disliked skepticism. I'd usually run skep whenever I could though since the topic wasn't very balanced philosophy-wise. | ||
| Line 48: | Line 52: | ||
JF23 -- Morp DA | JF23 -- Morp DA | ||
===== Theory ===== | ===== Theory ===== | ||
My other pride and joy: | My other pride and joy: | ||
[[:File:Prospect ST - Furry Spec.docx|JF23 -- Furry Spec]] | [[:File:Prospect ST - Furry Spec.docx|JF23 -- Furry Spec]] | ||
==== November/December ==== | ==== November/December ==== | ||
===== ACs ===== | ===== ACs ===== | ||
| Line 61: | Line 63: | ||
ND22 -- Kant AC Frontlines | ND22 -- Kant AC Frontlines | ||
===== NCs ===== | ===== NCs ===== | ||
Not the most viable NC, ran it mostly for the speaks thing I mentioned above. | Not the most viable NC, ran it mostly for the speaks thing I mentioned above. | ||
| Line 70: | Line 71: | ||
ND22 -- Particularism NC | ND22 -- Particularism NC | ||
==== September/October ==== | ==== September/October ==== | ||
===== ACs ===== | ===== ACs ===== | ||
| Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
=== 2021 -- 2022 === | === 2021 -- 2022 === | ||
It's literally all Kant. | It's literally all Kant. | ||
==== January/February ==== | ==== January/February ==== | ||
===== ACs ===== | ===== ACs ===== | ||