Notes on weighing

In my haste to get to lab last week, I forgot to print out my weighing lecture outline for you. In its stead, here is my updated list of potential weighing standards.

1] Deontology vs. Consequences - You can argue that one should consider moral rules (deontology) or consequences first. I am sure you saw a lot of this weighing in rounds today - I know I did. If you go with consequences, there are more methods for comparing competing
claims about consequences. See 2- X for these. To weigh deontology claims, you need to present a preferred source for obligations. In lab we mentioned the social contract (see Locke), procedural theories (Kant), and communitarian theories (see Etzioni) for different foundations for deontological claims.

2] Magnitude- This one is simple. You can argue that "big" impacts and more important than "small" impacts. The most obvious example would be that preventing a war may be "of a greater magnitude" than keeping T-shirt prices down.

3] Probability- One can also argue that impacts that are more likely are more important than impacts that one "may" happen. Usually this involves a comparison of a definite outcomes and an indefinite (maybe it will happen, maybe it won't) outcome.

4] Time frame - People generally prefer positive impacts that are closer in time. A burger today is better than a promise of a burger in a week (even if you have a 100% probability of getting the burger in a week).

5] Reversability - One could argue that it is more important to prevent bad things that can not be fixed after the fact. It is hard, for example, to reverse a war scenario. Short term harms to an
economy, however, may be fixable after the fact. Obviously, death is irreversible - so it is often the subject of reversability weighing.

This is not an exclusive list - but it is a pretty good start. Use these and try to think of some more!

Reading list for LD

A student in another lab asked me to put together a reading list. I thought I would share it with you too.

Introductory Classics:
Aristotle "Politics" (democratic theory, communitarianism, etc.)
Locke "Second Treatise on Civil Government" (social contract)
Rousseau "The Social Contract" (communitarian version of the social contract)
John Stuart Mill "Utilitarianism" and "On Liberty" (libertarianism and utilitarianism)
Kant "Groundwork on the Metaphysics of Ethics" (deontology)
Straus and Cropsey "History of Political Philosophy" (an introduction to a long list of classical authors – be selective though, some are not particularly relevant to LD)

Contemporary Classics:
Rawls "Justice as Fairness" (egalitarian)
Nozick "Anarchy, State, and Utopia" (libertarian)
Gewirth "Reason and Morality" and "The Community of Rights" (Neo-Kantian)
Gauthier "Morality by Agreement" (Neo-social contract)
Etzioni 'The New Golden Rule" (communitarian)
Peter Singer "Practical Ethics" (utilitarianism)
Sandel "Liberalism and the Limits of Justice" (communitarianism)

Introductions to some recently popular positions:
Allan "Contemporary Social and Sociological Theory" (lots of coverage of continental and radical thinkers from Wallerstein to Foucault to Baudrillard to West)
Delgado and Stefancic "Critical Race Theory: An Introduction"
Young "Justice and the Politics of Difference"

4th of July

Tournament rounds started today for the RDK lab. The lab was happy with their performances in rounds. Bekah received excellent feedback from AT. In rounds, students were exposed to ‘T’ violations, ‘K’ and counterplans. After rounds, the gang went to Taco Cabana for lunch. Though the line was long, the food was a good break from Bruce Hall. To be consistent, we walked back through the rain. After dinner, students enjoyed the 4^th of July by watching movies and comedy. After the fun, students went to their rooms to prepare for the next set of rounds tomorrow.

Practice Rounds Begin

In preparation for the camp tournament that starts Wednesday, our lab had practice rounds against the Wright/Miller/McGough lab. Students got to try out their cases with unfamiliar opponents and hear from critics with whom they were not familiar. Students learned a lot from getting rounds in front of another set of instructors. Now only final preparations remain before the tournament begins.

A reprieve from the rain, but not from work

This morning the lab focused on presentation in and out of round. Our female students learned that debate tournaments are not picnics and guys learned that Axe body spray and Febreeze is not a substitute for a shower and washing your clothes. Additionally, the students each got to choose which elective they would attend tomorrow. After lunch the lab split into three groups, with each focusing on one of three areas: case writing, research skills, and creating blocks. After dinner, Erfon and Bekah volunteered to participate in a demonstration round. Being a policy convert, it was Bekah's first time in an LD round,. She and Erfon both did a great job. After the round, the students had a chance to share what they thought about the round. Practice rounds start tomorrow so hopefully the students get plenty of rest for the intense days that are coming.

Working hard... no time to blog

Work in the lab has been proceeding at a break-neck pace. Today
students turned in both of their cases on the camp topic. While
finishing of their cases and their research projects, the lab leaders
discussed rebuttal skills and weighing in rounds. The fun starts
tomorrow with intra-lab skirmishes. We will see then what has come from the hours and hours of "noses in books" (and noses in word processors) over the past few days.

Camp topic

This year's resolution is: On balance, in its trade agreements the
United States ought to value the welfare of workers in developing
countries over its economic gains.