Speech and Debate


Speak Out NC
 
HomePortalFAQRegisterMemberlistLog in

Share | 
 

 Carl's new negative case

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Carl

avatar

Number of posts : 49
Age : 21
Location : Planet Earth
Registration date : 2007-12-12

PostSubject: Carl's new negative case   Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:07 pm

Could someone give me an example of when morality is achieved be valuing I/P equaly?

Thesis

Merriam Webster defines a doctrine or system of moral conduct
of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior

Contention 1-We should value idealism and pragmatism equally.
To support this, I will use the analogy of gardening. When you are gardening, you are being an idealist by pursuing your ideal of blooming flowers and ripe vegetables. But you are also valuing pragmatism by planting, watering, fertilizing, and weeding, all practical ways to grow a healthy plant. You are valuing idealism and pragmatism equally. Unless you wanted the ideal of blooming flowers and ripe vegetables you would not put the effort into planting, watering, fertilizing, and weeding. But without planting, watering, fertilizing, and weeding, you would not be able to achieve your goal. Gardening is a perfect example of how we should value idealism and pragmatism equally.

Contention 2-The resolution is an always statement.
If I told you to jump out of this window, would you jump? I hope not. But what if I told you to jump out of this window while the hallway is on fire, and jumping was the only way to escape? Then it would be a good idea. But in mast cases, it is not a good idea. Well, the resolution works the same way. Is it always good to jump out of this window? NO! Is it always good, when in conflict, to value idealism above pragmatism? NO, in most cases it will not work.

Contention 3-Morality is the highest value.
Without my value of morality, what would the world be like? It would be in complete chaos. People would have no moral convictions and would just do whatever they wanted to do without a though of if it was good for others. Is that a world that you would like to live in? Morality is what really matters. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Peter Carr, ***read slowly***
“Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you ... From the practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts in every moment of life, and in the moment of death.”


Contention 4-Negating the resolution allows us to pursue Morality.
As I stated earlier, valuing idealism and pragmatism allows us to achieve goal. I also stated earlier that there is no greater goal to achieve that morality. Therefore valuing idealism and pragmatism allows us to achieve morality. Just like the example of…um…

Guess I'm not done yet.

Now I would like to address the affirmative case…


Last edited by Carl on Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Carl

avatar

Number of posts : 49
Age : 21
Location : Planet Earth
Registration date : 2007-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Carl's new negative case   Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:58 pm

Imagine a world without morality. What would it be like? It would be in complete chaos of course! People would have no moral convictions and would just do whatever they wanted to do without a though of if it was good for others. Is that a world that you would like to live in? Morality is what really matters. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Peter Carr, ***read slowly***
“Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you ... From the practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts in every moment of life, and in the moment of death.”

As the negative speaker, it is my duty to show how negating the resolution—and valuing idealism and pragmatism equally—allows us to better pursue Morality. Hello, my I’m Carl Colglazier and this is my thesis—or main point—that I will be supporting it for the rest of this debate.

First off, I will define my value. Merriam Webster defines my value—morality, the highest value—as, “a doctrine or system of moral conduct”
It also defines moral as, “of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior”
Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
Carl's new negative case
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Negative Church Dreams
» a contractor with pending case eligible or qualify to join our bidding?
» Bidders should not have any pending case filed against the SSS????
» BAC disqualifying bidder for losing a labor case before SC
» ICAI to change exam pattern for CA Course...Case Studies to form part of Questions

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Speech and Debate :: year 2007-early2008 :: Archives 2008/2009-
Jump to: