Also just noticed the "you didn't really read much of R3 specifically" does that mean you didn't evaluate any of the defenses of my framing? Because Kohai only really made them in R2 so that's the earliest I could've made them.
I'm not sure how I could've fit things into my framing that would challenge his when he hadn't made his case yet. What did you think about my R2 attacks on his framing and the attacks on proportionality?
Also, were you just specifically looking for policy arguments from me and didn't like the philosophical angle?
Thanks for the vote! Few questions:
1. I'm curious about what your interpretation of my Magsino argument was. I was extending it off as a reason for why, in order to even conceptualize/evaluate Pro's framing, we had to accept mine. You seemed to believe that our frameworks could co-exist, whereas I was trying to argue that my framework was a prerequisite to theirs. Was there something I could've done to make that clearer?
2. How did you, if at all, evaluate the argument I made in R3 that people escaping prison was nonunique since they can just escape pre-death penalty anyway?
3. Can you elaborate on what you meant when you said my framing was "too vague" to warrant voting for it?
Lmao, oh this oughta be entertaining...
Wow! I didn't know you were *this* much of a fanboy.
Thanks for the vote! Couple questions:
1. I'm curious as to why you thought their framing was sufficient to meet the requirements of Magsino. My argument was that there needs to be some sort of external justification for why laws are good and bad and that their argument for their framing that "the government has a responsibility to protect people" wasn't sufficient. I'm guessing that wasn't your interpretation. Was there a better way to make this argument?
2. Did the argument that "people escaping prison to kill more is nonunique" factor into that discussion at all or did that come too late for you?
3. How did you evaluate the proportionality vs. the 'goals of justice' arguments I made?
Eh damnit, made a small mistake in my last round. Whatever, way too late to go back and fix it.
If the res is "Are endermen really descendants of humans", wouldn't Pro be agreeing with the Res? Isn't the position you want to defend the Con position?
I'm going to be busy tonight, so is it okay if I post my round in ~an hour?
:thumbsup:
You sure that gives you enough time for when you get back to respond?
Nah the res is more or less fair. There's plenty of room to make a variety of arguments for both sides.
Alright, my R2 is done. Let me know when you want me to post it.
Oh *COME ON*! I have so many kritiks that would work so well on this topic!
Nevermind, just reminded myself what chaos looked like and it doesnt work that well here. I *guess* I'll be boring instead...
Hmmm...to go for the R2 that guarantees a pretty clear road to victory but is boring, or the fun option that is just pure chaos...
Just checking in because you said you were gonna be out this weekend. You good on time?
Shaaaaame :p
No problem! Just message me when you're back, otherwise I'll wait until the last minute to post.
I'm still bummed because I had to cut an entire secondary framing argument and some more stock arguments (the latter I'll likely end up recycling as rebuttals, but still!).
Your turn!
Oh fuck, the real challenge, as always, is fitting all the arguments I want to make into the character limit. T_T
I'll try to have my R1 up before I go to sleep tonight but I can delay if you want time.
Oh wait and I'm pro too!?
Awh baby, I get to have fun :3
Oooh this one isn't bad. I can definitely work with this side.
I think you're using race and ethnicity more interchangeably than I am. Which in casual conversation is 100% chill, but since Pro is making a distinction between "neurological" and "biological" race, for whatever reason, probably isn't safe to do.
Uh huh...riiiiight...
..okay now that I'm thinking about it more (idk why I'm bothering), I *suppose* you could argue for this being an edge case application of body dysmorphia, but also realistically that's just not what that is...
Lmao...
So I'm going to skim over the obvious topic of "there's no fucking world where those two things are equivalent" because while gender dysphoria is very much a real thing, there very much is not an equivalent when it comes to ethnicity (that I'm aware of and can find).
I suppose the only hang up to saying that this is okay that I would have is in the instance of someone who is white wanting to become black or brown, would that count as cultural appropriation? I'm not sure, but it's close enough that I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to try it.
But otherwise, no I'm sure Shoresy and GratefulGoy would love to entertain your ideas of why trans people are awful.
The latter. I think the classification of people as an entirely different race 'biologically' can contextually be used to justify Other-izing minorities, so while you technically can nitpick on people's melanin levels and the like to say there are biological differences between people of different ethnicities, I'm just going to give you a very strong side eye.
