1,166
edits
Difference between revisions of "Philosophy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Terminology
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Phil debate is largely strategic for three reasons. Firstly, many philosophical positions are strategic against [[utilitarianism]], one of the most common frameworks read in LD. Proficient phil debaters can become very adept at answering util, making it very difficult for their opponents to get recourse. Secondly, many debaters don't understand the nuances of phil debate and as a result, struggle to properly defend their framework against objections. Thirdly, philosophical frameworks provide an alternative way to answering kritiks, and as a result, many K debaters, used to answering policy, are less prepared to defend their positions against phil. | Phil debate is largely strategic for three reasons. Firstly, many philosophical positions are strategic against [[utilitarianism]], one of the most common frameworks read in LD. Proficient phil debaters can become very adept at answering util, making it very difficult for their opponents to get recourse. Secondly, many debaters don't understand the nuances of phil debate and as a result, struggle to properly defend their framework against objections. Thirdly, philosophical frameworks provide an alternative way to answering kritiks, and as a result, many K debaters, used to answering policy, are less prepared to defend their positions against phil. | ||
== | == Construction of Frameworks == | ||
This section is under construction. | This section is under construction. | ||
=== Terminology === | === Terminology === | ||
=== | Framework | ||
Contention | |||
Value | |||
Value Criterion / Standard | |||
Syllogism | |||
=== Structure of Frameworks === | |||
== Common Philosophies == | == Common Philosophies == | ||
[[Utilitarianism]] is likely the most common framework read in LD. Used as the framework for [[policy]] positions, utilitarian frameworks center around maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. | [[Utilitarianism]] is likely the most common framework read in LD. Used as the framework for [[policy]] positions, utilitarian frameworks center around maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. | ||
| Line 26: | Line 36: | ||
[[Moral Skepticism]] is not a philosophical framework, as it advocates the opposite of what other frameworks say! Skepticism argues that it is impossible to be moral, and the quest for moral truth is meaningless. | [[Moral Skepticism]] is not a philosophical framework, as it advocates the opposite of what other frameworks say! Skepticism argues that it is impossible to be moral, and the quest for moral truth is meaningless. | ||
[[Determinism]], also not a philosophical framework, argues that all actions since the beginning of the universe have been predetermined, which means agents are not morally culpable for the decisions that they make. | [[Determinism]], also not a philosophical framework, argues that all actions since the beginning of the universe have been predetermined, which means agents are not morally culpable for the decisions that they make. | ||
[[Plato]] establishes that an ideal, perfect, and abstract form exists of any object, and charges us with discovering and attempting to find these forms in our lives. | [[Plato]] establishes that an ideal, perfect, and abstract form exists of any object, and charges us with discovering and attempting to find these forms in our lives. | ||