competing claims - not question of implementation 1.
violates prefer we know way to decide what is meaningfull
entitled need to organs 2. plans bad takes out - inflite abuse - reasonable aff gets to frame skew aff rodriguez presumption post mortem body 1. presumption not when deceased - until dead cannot overcome inherent meanlingless absurdism cannot overcome meaningless cammuu thought reduces human understanding 1. human need incoherent - human understanding only images we attribute all though antopomopic frames ehtical thought human approximations quantum theory tells us otherwise game of prediction 3. death renders meaningless cancels life meaning - death only reality inevitible of death 4. insitutions exist to have meaning reder social institution 5 paradox of god makes meaningless cammus 3 master absurdity - ether not free or god not all powerfull absuridism comes first res epistimological theory more weight to living 1. all conclusion must priotize human expreience cammus 4 outwieghts cant experience 2. people dead organs not relavent 3. all values genvise 3 truthworthy real experience is just 4 only response is to recognize bransher - accurate - limits reflection goes beyond individual conditional statement ought to presume consent - deny society - skep affirms reders entire conditional true prefer aff interps on t 1. reders moot b clash about topic kills educaiton 3 drop arg on t and other interp issue b return substance on debate theory interps defience cx checks dead people no autonomy harris a. aff must defend implementation b doesnt defend policy option critical thinking skills krital et al reflect critical thinking skills alternative worlds of thinking giroux - development of phil critical thinkers to transfrom system outwieghts ed or fariness agents of change arbitary metric no brightline competing interps drop arg - go for nc turns no rvi 1. collapse to all theory bad substance ed- link to real world 2. incentives neg not run theory 3. good theory debaters abusive illogical 4. alwasya abuseive outweights time skew - rvi not neg be more abusive they get first speech solves back time skew arg 2. turn allows ability strategic decisions aff exclusive rvi not solve side bias solves back for reciprocity unrealiable sandbabu takes out ac induction - maintaining belief sanubabu 2 introspect when pain and objectively true sinubabu 3 pleasure others good minimizing harm policy makers util woller schider util solves fw about action look to indiviudal steops k lobby political thinking distintive human intrincic aff cx checks animals between humans first analysis deceased defined as person includes animals vote for k singer - other animals less intelligent animals suffer b alternatives morally political makes courses of action possible exclude not read alt bad under role of ballot meta theory precedrual claims have to evualte that first comes before 1. violates prefer we know way to decide what is meaningfull 2. plans bad takes out - inflite abuse - reasonable aff gets to frame skew aff rodriguez presumption post mortem body 1. presumption not when deceased - until dead all meaning subjective takes out antro illogical takes out sinababu subjective meaning 3. prefer my offense how we evauate concedes life prereq conditional statement ought to presume consent - deny society - skep affirms extend interp priorty calims extend interp - does not meet 1. grammar only interp accoutns for this abuse extend violation 2. fiction presumption buzz word grammar comes first resolvesd preformative nature which means policy option 2. turn resolved what future american hertiage question course of action legislator more gramatical - need competing interp debate key to fairness dont use legal terms 1. non unique 2. turn it disillusioned - philosopical effect control link to crit ed also gives better understanding extend critical think 1. arg turn not contextualizes role playingmkew internal link also concedeing giroux social recontructionalists second phil clash indicate still run fw but still debate fw weighing phil ed wont create ed space cant be neutral internal link to phil ed no rvi 1. collapse to all theory bad substance ed- link to real world 2. incentives neg not run theory 3. good theory debaters abusive illogical 4. alwasya abuseive outweights time skew - rvi not neg be more abusive they get first speech solves back time skew arg 2. turn allows ability strategic decisions fw about action look to indiviudal steops distintive human intrincic aff cx checks first analysis deceased defined as person vote for k singer - other animals less intelligent animals suffer b alternatives morally political exclude not read alt bad under role of ballot 1. a interpdebaters must only read normative inetps 1. ci aff should be able to defend prefiat keller b I meet 1. philsophical ed internal link to crit ed consistant with role of ballot CI net preferable theorectical warrant ignore phil debate oppresive space better deabter moot substance controls internal link to pedagogy nonsentsical directly conflicts - need to win I dont link tautological kills ground fairness voter critical ed needs safe space need to be fair space crti needs 2. diincentivie - controls link to crt ed a neg must defend aff interps on t if theres words so basis in topic lit problem conedeing semantic issue aff desont set issues extend ac args extend ground skew t negates 6 min offense when we speak langauage differs derives meaning clash extend - abusive not infinite abuse I meet to interp not reasonable - not meet as long reasonable and basis on topical literature aff must accept interps of nc semantic I meet strong link into my shell meta theory precedrual claims have to evualte that first comes before evaulae debate on all - which ones meta preferable contrain it but still critically unpedagoical grammer non responsive - only my interp what it means winning grammar - argue about def grammatical structure - winning grammar metatheory grammar comes first resolvesd preformative nature which means policy option 2. turn resolved what future american hertiage question course of action legislator more gramatical - need competing interp debate 1. non unique 2. turn it disillusioned - philosopical effect control link to crit ed also gives better understanding extend critical think 1. arg turn not contextualizes role playingmkew internal link also concedeing giroux social recontructionalists second phil clash indicate still run fw but still debate fw weighing phil ed wont create ed space cant be neutral no rvi 1. collapse to all theory bad substance ed- link to real world 2. incentives neg not run theory 3. good theory debaters abusive illogical 4. alwasya abuseive 1. ci aff should be able to defend prefiat internal link to crit ed consistant with role of ballot CI net preferable controls internal link to pedagogy nonsentsical directly conflicts - need to win I dont link link of standard crit ed - phil does matter link to cirt ed conceding ground standard concdeding meta theory ground massive impact look to me need to establish rules first fairness comes first - weighed agsinst crit ed examine underying factors massive links to fairness and ed crit not clear doesnt contest kills ground extend clash controls crit ed not why look to meta theory aff must accept interps of nc semantic I meet precedrual claim if his theory is inherently unfair not winning because cheating contrain it but still critically unpedagoical grammer non responsive - only my interp what it means winning grammar - argue about def grammatical structure - winning grammar metatheory grammar comes first resolvesd preformative nature which means policy option 2. turn resolved what future american hertiage question course of action legislator more gramatical - need competing interp debate
(the History and Theory of International Law) Stefan Kadelbach, Thomas Kleinlein, David Roth-Isigkeit-System, Order, And International Law_ the Early History of International Legal Thought From Machia