The Bowery Presents
pixel skylines
gracie abrams
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
@theartofmadeline
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!
tannertan36
Misplaced Lens Cap
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
One Nice Bug Per Day
occasionally subtle
No title available
PR's Tumblrdome
ojovivo
$LAYYYTER
Interview Vampire Daily
cherry valley forever
Andulka
No title available
Origami Around
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Malaysia
seen from Canada
seen from Singapore
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from Colombia
seen from Singapore
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
@debatecamp
Dear Coaches and Staff: I was wondering if I was not receiving the assignments and feedback through my email. My last assignment submitted was on July 13th and there has been no feedback or new assignment sent. Is the institute on a break or is it a problem with my email?
The problem is not with your email, I assure you. Just a brief interruption in service while our coaches have dealt with new jobs, illnesses, and national news happening across the street from Boxer Institute HQ.
Resolutional Analysis!
Incidentally, I’m super proud of all the assignments that have been turned in so far. Keep up the good work!
The Camp Topic is out!
Resolved: The United States government ought to curtail the Commander-in-Chief powers of the President
Assignment 1
I’ve been very impressed with the assignments that have been turned in so far. If you still have an assignment to turn in, please do it ASAP - it’s the first week, and I’ll probably still give you feedback.
Lecture 2 is available now! You might notice that this one is availabe in parts - - see below for the other links. Whole Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUezEFwpuU&list=PLwhdbU6YE1H6V3GYSm-voogeMtiJb_-Ht Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlLr-8PPNpM&feature=youtu.be Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRP0K0R6qMM Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpq3Wpn9sz0&feature=youtu.be
Assignment, as usual, to come Wednesday. Don’t forget the Week 1 assignment, due Wednesday! -Geordin
the most useful application of this information is in times when you have a card which says “research says X” and your opponent has a card that says “research says not X”. being able to articulate reasons why their research isn’t as “good” (applicable, detailed, thorough, etc) will tip the scales in the battle of the experts. And at some level, you are going to have to look to the real world, and to real world harms (unless you structure your case in such a way that simply breaking the moral/logical/whatever reason is enough). Knowing how to handle this kind of research is important.
-Nick
Lecture 2 is available now! You might notice that this one is availabe in parts - - see below for the other links. Whole Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUezEFwpuU&list=PLwhdbU6YE1H6V3GYSm-voogeMtiJb_-Ht Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlLr-8PPNpM&feature=youtu.be Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRP0K0R6qMM Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpq3Wpn9sz0&feature=youtu.be
Assignment, as usual, to come Wednesday. Don’t forget the Week 1 assignment, due Wednesday! -Geordin
How should we submit the first assignments that we have been emailed about?
Please submit them to the email inbox! ([email protected])
Introducing your 2016 Boxer Institute Faculty! Here’s a little bit about us. Remember, you’re always welcome to ask for advice from one of us specifically. We all have different strengths and weaknesses! We’ll try to keep running commentary and participation all around as we go through the season to help you get the most balanced education possible. :)
Aisha Hello, everyone! My name is Aisha Mohamed and I am a student at the University of Minnesota. I am currently studying Psychology, Political Science, and Cultural Studies & Comparative Literature. I am not sure what my post-graduation plans are but my main two options are law & medicine. As far as debate is concerned, I was a debater at Rosemount High School for all four years. After graduation I maintained ties to the debate world by working as a judge. I am ecstatic to be working with all of you! Debate has changed my life in ways I still don’t understand, but can appreciate. I know debate has fueled my intellectual growth more than any other activity, and it certainly made me a better global citizen—that’s a legacy I want to contribute to, which is why I am here! I will forever be a proud member of the LD squad and I look forward to exploring this amazing activity and going on this journey of learning with all of you! Nick Nick Muellerleile (Pronounced “Miller-lie-lee”) is the Head of Curriculum Development for the Boxer Institute. He has 4 years of experience debating Lincoln Douglas, and 2 years of coaching experience. Nick graduated in 2011 from the University of Southern California, with a B.A. in Communication, with an emphasis in Argument Theory; he is presently at the University of Minnesota Law School, pursuing a J.D. He also once worked on a Lana Del Rey music video. In his free time, he does stand-up comedy. He describes his approach to debate this way: You don’t need to get too clever or too fancy to win. Just use your frameworking and their arguments to show that they haven’t met their burden, or that you better uphold the value of the round. Katherine I am a recent graduate from the University of Minnesota, leaving with a triple B.A. in German, English, and Jewish Studies alongside a Hebrew minor. While I’m still struggling to find the magical job that matches my strange blend of languages and cultures, I work at Rosemount High School as an assistant debate and speech coach, for which the former I lead novice policy practices. Throughout my five years of coaching, I have spent considerable time in both policy and LD, participating as a coach and as a judge in diverse tournaments. My strong background in policy -- I debated policy at Rosemount for three years until I moved to Atlanta, where I graduated from high school -- is an advantage in the recent evolution of LD, that uses all sorts of policy jargon. However, I am of the strong belief that LD is a wholly distinct and unique style of debate, and I am excited to work with our team members to provide a holistic view of LD, the “stock” and this weird force we call “policy.” I am excited to meet y’all and spread the grim gospel of K’s, CP’s, and other strange words! Geordin Hello everyone! I’m Geordin (like Jordan). I’m serving as the Director of Operations for the Boxer Institute. I am a recent graduate of the University of Minnesota with a B.A. in Psychology and a minor in Gender, Women’s, and Sexuality Studies (or GWSS, pronounced Gee Whiz). I’m currently half-way through a M.A. in Human Resources and Industrial Relations, because (1) people and their differences and talents fascinate me and (2) Corporate America pays and I got student loans. I’ve been debating since I was in seventh grade -- two years of PF, and then four years of LD. For the last three years, I have joined Katherine at Rosemount High School to coach the novice LD team. Since my joining, the novice LD squad has been privy to unprecedented success; not really sure what I’m doing that’s making it happen, but it seems to work, so I guess I’ll keep on doing it. I’m very traditionalist in my style, partly because it’s what I know and partly because of my firm belief in policy-and-theory-oriented LD as inextricably tied to classism. That being said, you’ll see a LOT of evidence work being taught and commented on by me, as I have worked as a researcher for years -- stock doesn’t have to be boring, after all!
Lecture 1.1 Geordin: I agree with most of what Nick has to say here. I might add, though, that a lack of clash isn’t inherently bad. As you may know, it is perfectly possible to win without totally engaging with the opposite side, and I think it’s important to address that, especially given time constraints. That being said, as a judge, I always wanna hear a REAL good reason why you’re outweighing so heavily that you can ignore the other side.
Another thing: Tthere’s a pretty good model in organizational & social psychology for persuasion and influence: peripheral influence vs central influence. There are elaborations on the model, but this is the simplest incarnation. Basically, peripheral is what Nick was saying about that “added factor” that gets you over the hump of a simple logical argument – tone, poise, confidence, relatability, etc. Donald Trump, for example, is extraordinarily heavy on peripheral influence… not so much on central, which is comprised moreso of logic and “ethos.”
Troubling Trolleys
Nick here.
I want to talk about a classic ethical dilemma/philosophy problem, but I want to hopefully put a new spin on it, to show a skill that is essential in debate. Also, this post deals with runaway trolleys and people in distress, so just a heads up if that kind of thing really isn’t your jam.
So the Trolley Problem typically comes in two parts. The first part assumes that a trolley is speeding out of control towards 5 people who are on the tracks, and will probably not get out of the way in time. BUT there is a switch,which would divert the trolley to a parallel track. The problem is that there is one person on this track, and they also probably won’t be able to get out of the way of the trolley. The question is then posed: do you throw the switch?
The second part is a little more gruesome. Same trolley, same 5 people in peril, but instead of being by a switch, you are on a gangplank over the track. next to you is Gorto, The Enormous Man (tm). Gorto is so large, that were he to be in front of the trolley, his size would stop the trolley, sparing the 5 on the tracks, but Gorto would almost certainly die in the process. The question asks whether you would push Gorto in front of the trolley.
----------------------
I want to take a different approach. I want to figure out the limits of your obligation to make a moral choice.
Suppose you aren’t there at all. Nobody is. “5 killed in trolley accident” the newspaper headline reads. You feel sad. This isn’t a situation where you were faced with a moral choice to make, right?
Suppose you’re walking through the railyard, right past the switch. You are unaware of the switch, or of the speeding trolley; you have your headphones in and are lost in thought. We’ll even say that you stop right next to the switch, but are unaware of it,or what it does. Do you have a moral obligation to act, here?
Suppose a situation like the one above, but you notice there is a switch, but do not notice the trolley or the people. You can play around with the facts here, but give yourself incomplete information. Is there a situation where you can have incomplete information, and have a moral obligation to act?
Suppose something entirely different: Suppose you’re totally aware of how trolley systems work; you read Trolley Control Monthly magazine all the time. You even live in an apartment overlooking the local trolley line, on the 25th floor. In this situation, you see the calamity about to unfold, and you can see with exact precision the lever you would have to pull. But you are 25 floors away, and cannot get to the trolley in time. Do you have a moral obligation to do something here?
------------------
Suppose an additional entirely different scenario,that raises entirely different questions: Suppose you write the handbook for trolley line employees. You represent the company, so your choice to act matters here. At a rules discussion meeting, someone asks if a switch operator should be required to switch a runaway trolley from a line with 5 people on it, to a line with one person on it. Another person asks whether it is a good idea for the company to mandate a rule requiring an employee to (in essence) kill another employee. What do you say?
Suppose an even broader situation. Now, instead of being a trolley employee, you are a lawmaker. Someone raises a bill which would require somebody faced with a choice to kill one person in order to save the lives of many people, to kill that one person. Do you vote for this bill? A modified version of the bill exists, which would not mandate killing a person, but which would allow “defense of many” as a defense reducing the severity of the charge from murder to manslaughter, for example. Would you vote for that? Does it matter if the majority of your constituents would follow a rule like that, even if it were not a rule?
----------------
In the first batch of hypotheticals, we’re trying to test the limits of what causes someone to have a moral obligation. Can I have an obligation to do something I don’t know I “need” to do? Can I have an obligation to do something I cannot do? What are other factors that become relevant, and when do they become relevant? What does this tell us about the nature of moral obligation?
The second batch tries to deal with what happens when moral choices exist in other spheres. What happens when individualized choices gain official enforcement mechanisms? You can plug in different hypotheticals here, but what happens when there is an opportunity for a government or other official entity to make the “right” choice for you? Is it the same as when you make the choice for yourself?
These matter in debate. If you can define a limit for when a moral obligation exists, then you have a very easy test for the judge to follow. (eg, a moral obligation exists when someone is aware of and can act to save lives, means you only have to prove “awareness” and “ability” to show the moral obligation exists)
Hello! After we sign up, when can we expect an email to confirm our acceptance to the camp? Thank you!
Yes. Those emails will come soon.
Debate Camp is In Session!
Welcome to the 2016 Summer Online Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate Camp, Organized by the Boxer Institute for Debate and Speech! At the Boxer Institute, we combine 20+ years of debate experience in order to create a meaningful learning experience for High School students who do not otherwise have the opportunity to attend existing Lincoln-Douglas debate camps.
As a participant, you will receive: • 8-10 weeks of online instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate in an online video-course format • An opportunity for at least one online tournament-style debate round, judged by our esteemed colleagues
Topics covered will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Topic Analysis • Research Strategies & Advanced Evidence Analysis • Casewriting • Effective Rebuttals • How to Run Theory (and how not to run theory) • How to Win Over Your Judge • Presentation
Expectations: • Mutual Respect and Professionalism • Completion of weekly assignments on a timely basis • Hard work and determination
What you will receive: • Personalized feedback on individual assignments. • A variety of perspectives on issues • Opportunities for one-on-one interaction: • Lessons for all skill levels
How to Sign Up: Please fill out the google form at this link • We will cap enrollment at the first 60 students, so sign up as soon as possible! Please note that camp will start in late June and run through most of August, so check your calendars now!
Signups will close a week from tomorrow: 6/26. Be sure to nab your slot before we close up!! Our first course video should go up tomorrow – keep an eye out for it!
Debate Camp is In Session!
Welcome to the 2016 Summer Online Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate Camp, Organized by the Boxer Institute for Debate and Speech! At the Boxer Institute, we combine 20+ years of debate experience in order to create a meaningful learning experience for High School students who do not otherwise have the opportunity to attend existing Lincoln-Douglas debate camps.
As a participant, you will receive: • 8-10 weeks of online instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate in an online video-course format • An opportunity for at least one online tournament-style debate round, judged by our esteemed colleagues
Topics covered will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Topic Analysis • Research Strategies & Advanced Evidence Analysis • Casewriting • Effective Rebuttals • How to Run Theory (and how not to run theory) • How to Win Over Your Judge • Presentation
Expectations: • Mutual Respect and Professionalism • Completion of weekly assignments on a timely basis • Hard work and determination
What you will receive: • Personalized feedback on individual assignments. • A variety of perspectives on issues • Opportunities for one-on-one interaction: • Lessons for all skill levels
How to Sign Up: Please fill out the google form at this link • We will cap enrollment at the first 60 students, so sign up as soon as possible! Please note that camp will start in late June and run through most of August, so check your calendars now!
Debate Camp is In Session!
Welcome to the 2016 Summer Online Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate Camp, Organized by the Boxer Institute for Debate and Speech! At the Boxer Institute, we combine 20+ years of debate experience in order to create a meaningful learning experience for High School students who do not otherwise have the opportunity to attend existing Lincoln-Douglas debate camps.
As a participant, you will receive: • 8-10 weeks of online instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate in an online video-course format • An opportunity for at least one online tournament-style debate round, judged by our esteemed colleagues
Topics covered will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Topic Analysis • Research Strategies & Advanced Evidence Analysis • Casewriting • Effective Rebuttals • How to Run Theory (and how not to run theory) • How to Win Over Your Judge • Presentation
Expectations: • Mutual Respect and Professionalism • Completion of weekly assignments on a timely basis • Hard work and determination
What you will receive: • Personalized feedback on individual assignments. • A variety of perspectives on issues • Opportunities for one-on-one interaction: • Lessons for all skill levels
How to Sign Up: Please fill out the google form at this link • We will cap enrollment at the first 60 students, so sign up as soon as possible! Please note that camp will start in late June and run through most of August, so check your calendars now!
Debate Camp is In Session!
Welcome to the 2016 Summer Online Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate Camp, Organized by the Boxer Institute for Debate and Speech! At the Boxer Institute, we combine 20+ years of debate experience in order to create a meaningful learning experience for High School students who do not otherwise have the opportunity to attend existing Lincoln-Douglas debate camps.
As a participant, you will receive: • 8-10 weeks of online instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate in an online video-course format • An opportunity for at least one online tournament-style debate round, judged by our esteemed colleagues
Topics covered will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Topic Analysis • Research Strategies & Advanced Evidence Analysis • Casewriting • Effective Rebuttals • How to Run Theory (and how not to run theory) • How to Win Over Your Judge • Presentation
Expectations: • Mutual Respect and Professionalism • Completion of weekly assignments on a timely basis • Hard work and determination
What you will receive: • Personalized feedback on individual assignments. • A variety of perspectives on issues • Opportunities for one-on-one interaction: • Lessons for all skill levels
How to Sign Up: Please fill out the google form at this link • We will cap enrollment at the first 60 students, so sign up as soon as possible! Please note that camp will start in late June and run through most of August, so check your calendars now!
if i will be gone for two weeks can i still sign up?
Absolutely! You'll want to let us know the dates in advance, but we can forgive the assignments from that week, if any, or move dates around. Our primary goals are access and education. :)
Debate Camp is In Session!
Welcome to the 2016 Summer Online Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate Camp, Organized by the Boxer Institute for Debate and Speech! At the Boxer Institute, we combine 20+ years of debate experience in order to create a meaningful learning experience for High School students who do not otherwise have the opportunity to attend existing Lincoln-Douglas debate camps.
As a participant, you will receive: • 8-10 weeks of online instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate in an online video-course format • An opportunity for at least one online tournament-style debate round, judged by our esteemed colleagues
Topics covered will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Topic Analysis • Research Strategies & Advanced Evidence Analysis • Casewriting • Effective Rebuttals • How to Run Theory (and how not to run theory) • How to Win Over Your Judge • Presentation
Expectations: • Mutual Respect and Professionalism • Completion of weekly assignments on a timely basis • Hard work and determination
What you will receive: • Personalized feedback on individual assignments. • A variety of perspectives on issues • Opportunities for one-on-one interaction: • Lessons for all skill levels
How to Sign Up: Please fill out the google form at this link • We will cap enrollment at the first 60 students, so sign up as soon as possible! Please note that camp will start in late June and run through most of August, so check your calendars now!
Casewriting! More advanced shit
A quick note on subpoints vs new contentions. I personally believe that the difference is the mechanism by which your argument functions determines whether something should be a subpoint or a contention. For example, ‘Promoting democracy promotes autonomy by giving individuals a voice’, and ‘promoting democracy promotes autonomy by respecting individual wishes’ could be subpoints of the same contention because both arguments prove the criterion and value by virtue of the same mechanism: promoting autonomy. If however your case said something like ‘Promoting democracy promotes autonomy’ and ‘promoting democracy promotes regional stability, which respects autonomy and rights because people get killed less’ those would be separate contentions.
I read a post on one of the debate sites from someone who claimed that putting too many pre-empts in an affirmative case was bad for debate. I respectfully disagree, because pre-empts 1. are necessary given the sheer breadth of negative positions out there, and 2. can be seamlessly included into a case. Here are some of my favorite things to do.
Use definitions as resolutional analysis.
Following the definition of a term, you can include a quick line or two about what that definition means for the round, what it includes or doesn’t include.
Impacts!
These are great places to include inherency spikes. eg., ‘this only happens on the affirmative side because reasons”
Other places in the case:
It may be that there is a piece of analysis that would let you detour to something that would otherwise be an observation at the top of the case. Put it there, and you make it clear that it matters, and it may be something your opponent skips. Your judge may skip it as well
Two things your case should have:
-a line somewhere about why the actor in the resolution must be the actor doing whatever it is the resolution wants you to do. This precludes any case that says there’s an agent out there that can do it better
-A line somewhere about why the thing the resolution is about is the best way to accomplish your value. this precludes counterplans
Overviews and underviews:
Underviews (resolutional analysis at the end of the case that sneaks in in like the last 15 seconds) is where most people put their shittiest and shiftiest arguments. We know this by now. Don’t use them.
Overviews are like huge ‘Attack this!’ signs. This can be used to your advantage. If you have a piece of resolutional analysis that seems like it’s important, but which only slightly narrows the scope of what you have to prove, and which you don’t have to win to win the round, you can frame it as an observation. Or you can save the time and not put it in, instead choosing to only run the best arguments you have. Your call.