Here are my main arguments against the Affirmative points this is based on my case.
1)Pragmatism Needs Idealism.
I agree with my opponent in that Pragmatism are needed to solve any problem or reach any goal,but in the majority of situations where the two conflict pragmatism will achieve the goal faster and more effectively than idealism.As Thomas Edison said "invention is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.All parts are needed for the whole but the 99% is more encompassing than the 1% and as such should be valued above which negates the resolution.in fact idealism needs Pragmatism much more than vice versa.
2)The easiest way is not always the best way.
I agree with my opponents statement that the easiest way is not always the best way but according to my definition of pragmatic (insert definition or use affirmatives') it is not the easy way. In fact I believe that in many cases the idealist way supports the easy way.If for example I am an idealist and my ideal is morality the easiest way to achieve my ideal would be to lock myself in a tower and shut myself off from humanity.By doing so I would succeed in my value of Morality but I don't think that my opponent says that way is right. even if ideals support the long way they still wouldn't be the best as neither the short or long way achieves true progress the pragmatic way does.
3)Pragmatism is a means to an end (see the first argument or most of it)
The means contribute more to the goal than the ideal remember Ideals and goals are different.
4)Pragmatism is inconsistent
Pragmatism is not inconsistent it is flexible.Idealism on the other hand is consistent even to the point of death but pragmatism without regard to theory's or ideals can better achieve objectives because it can duck and weave through obstacles whereas Idealism hopes not to get stuck
