fcontracts preflow

8/12/2019 fContracts Preflow

1/5

Contracts Preflow 1

reFW

resume aff since a. over thinking about thealidity of actions would paralyze us from acting,nd b. Affirming is harder, as proven by the 7% negias 1 on a sample size of over 30 thousand rounds,o you assume I did the better debating if werequal.

ack of obligation affirms bc normative obligationsre fulfilled by sufficient reasons which can be mety a lack of a counter-reason.

Also, default is rehab since a) retribution iseserved punishment, and b) we arent surehat criminals are guilty so it is better tovoid punishing an innocent

ext, Prefer reasonable AFF interps since I speakrst and therefore have interpretive leeway.

Moreover, its impossible to pick a perfect interp, sothe neg presents a better one dont drop me;

ather let us debate under his interpretation since

s more unfair to drop me on face,

xtend that only aff gets RVIs. (I meet anderminal defense/ drop the argument.)) neg could overwhelm; checks backtrategic tool. 2) time skew: theory takes aot of time to answer. And, nc is reactive.

Also, 3) neg cant get RVIs because they have13-7 minute advantage on theory.

xtend, that the neg must provide me thepportunity to concede to theory or Tiolations in cx or prep time. 1) preventnnecessary theory and allow me to retifybuse. 2) avoid ambiguity in norm creationnd encourage substantive debate. 3)onflicting shells means I always violate.

And, rules of logic would demand that if weeny the antecedent of a premise, then thetatement as a whole is trivially held to be true


2/5

Contracts Preflow 2

W:

value morality.

) judgements about absolute good are only

remised on a predetermined notion of theood.

Wittgenstein: absolute obligations dont exist.subjective)

An absolute good is incoherent since itequires motivation to follow it even though it inconsistent with the ends of individuals.

Also, any individuals can always question whyhey should follow an absolute good andhoose to ignore.

hus, the only way for morality to exist and unifyveryones different subjective conception is to

odify the law and create one objective,ncontestable law. Laws are by nature a compilationf relative end goals of individuals. This also

mandates that the US look to international lawshenever possible because international law

ompiles more relative opinions in order to create aetter norm.

) emotivist: Explanations of truth claimsmust be simplified in order to eliminaterbitrary information that is false. Arbitrarynformation grants the explainer the license to

make up false data

Ayer: all ethical claims are merely statingeoples disapproval with an action, not that it ethically wrong. Saying you acted wrongly is

merely evincing moral disapproval.

ontracts are the best system under an emotivistytem because a) it reduces statements of sentimento statements of fact that can be verified throughmpirical legal standards. A contract is inherently aystem of compiling and recording multipleispositions, and b) laws dont need to refer to some

moral rules that we lack the faculties to understand.dditionally, this justifies following internationalw first since it takes into account more peoples

nclinations.

) Morality must be able to guide action. Legalontracts are the only moral system that can guidection because they tell us exactly what to dohrough codified, explicit norms. Also, any rule isubject to a problem of interpretation since therere indefinitely many possible interpretations. Theroblem is that trying to solve this requires the usef a different interpretation, which is infinitelyegressive. Moral norms require an objective rulen order to be applied because we need an externaludge to tell us whether our implementation of


3/5

Contracts Preflow 3

ertain norms is correct- otherwise, actions woulde self- justifying and thus unjustified. Laws donteed to be objective in order to contain the sameormative force because a) the state can justecide which interpretation to follow since it is aigher authority that posses the legislative andxecutive power to implement it, and b) alternatews dont affect the le gal standing of other laws.

nd, this also provides a reason to be consistentith international law since the justification for

ollowing arbitrary norms is that it comes from theighest authority.

) A governments identity is defined by itsonsistency with laws. The US government wouldill be the US government if the people in ithanged, but it would no longer be the USovernment if the whole structure of legal normshanged. This has a few implications: a) the Unitedtates is motivated to be consistent with lawsecause by willing to follow laws it wills theonsistency of itself, b) legal obligations are therimary function of governments because the onlyeason we have governments is so they can

stablish, enforce, and follow laws, and c) if theovernment is inconsistent with its laws then it iso longer a government, denying an assumption inhe resolution.

lso, legal contracts are motivational forovernments since they would seek to avoidiolating laws because it will make them seemlegitimate in front of their citizens and the

nternational arena. And, If ethics arentmotivational, then morality would devolve into

ihilism since individuals could always questionmaxims applicability. And, even if the government

reducible to individuals then it would still bemotivated since the individuals who are in the

overnment are still bound to laws, so they would

eek to avoid violating laws so as not to go to jail.

dditionally, Legal contracts have the most realorld applicability since otherwise the moral thing

o do might be something illegal, which wouldevolve morality into a contradiction.

moral obligations are impossible to derive, arencoherent, or fail to generate obligatory actions,hen you default back to legal obligations because) the government must always be able to take anction and have explicit guidance, b) theesolution presupposes that obligations exist aser the word ought and the particular obligation-e must default to another evaluative mechanismthe first one fails, and c) governments are

reated to fulfill multiple different obligationsowards citizens and other nations, so they stillave some obligations even if their moral onesail. If morality is incoherent, the only legitimatebligations that the government has left are itsgal obligations.

: consistency with legalgreements-international


4/5

Contracts Preflow 4

CONTENTIONS

) Rotman1: Three acticles of customarynternational law: the UN Standard Minimum Rulesor the Treatment of Prisoners, The ICCPR, and themerican Convention of Human Rights

refer International:

) largest in scope: 190 countries b) most widelyccepted as authority, part of US identity c)bligations must be mutually consistent bynternational laws. Lack of international law meanso obligations.

nd, in the case of contradictory contracts that areresolvable, the government is both obligated androhibited from taking an action. This does notisprove the ethical theory but rather indicateshat either action is permissible because there is no

morally stronger justification to do one over thether.

contracts are impossible to derive or areadthen no prohibition bc they are the onlyodified legal distinctions outlining state action.

) US

A) Rotman2: constitution basedn equal protection

) Rotman3: customarynternational law is binding

nd, this means aff is the status quonce legal arguments inform theovernment s value system. Sincexisting laws dictate that we favorehabilitation, the government isurrently valuing rehabilitationigher. This is also evident in theradual shift to rehabilitation

methods throughout the country.

hus, the neg is a deviation from theatus quo as it mandates that currentolicy be changed and our actionsowards universal healthcare behifted. This means both the aff is anmission but also that permissibilityoes aff since we wouldnt shift fromhe squo unless we were obligated to;

his is true since:A.

The state doesntaste resources by taking actions thaterivate from the squo since it wouldrevent the state from using thoseesources to fulfill authenticbligations B. Shifting from the statusuo poses unnecessary risks to theate as we dont know what horrific

hings can happen. Thus, unless therea proactive reason to shift from the

quo, the state is obligated not to doo.


5/5

Contracts Preflow 5

Underview

A) IEER: Effective commitment tonternational law is necessary toheck extinction US commitment

niquely key. B) Perm affirms

) Merriam Webster definesught as used to express moralghtness. Thus, lack of arohibition proves that weught to take the action since weefault to actions being right. Too otherwise would makections that have no moralearing such as breathing

morally wrong.

) it compensates for afftructural skew through the NCme skew and reactivity. Thenly topics where the side biasalances out are topics that say

morally permissible.

) Permissibility is only consistentwith obligations because anbligation necessarily entailsermissibility, but a prohibitionenies permissibility. Therefore,ermissibility would beontradictory to the neg burden,ut it could be true in conjunctiono the aff burden.

) Negation means, refusingonsent, as to a proposal soegating the resolution denies theossibility of acting.

fcontracts preflow

Documents