Comments on: National Forensic Journal http://www.socal-ld.net/2009/10/12/national-forensic-journal/ Southern California's NFA-LD site Fri, 23 Dec 2011 20:45:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: nerdy db8r http://www.socal-ld.net/2009/10/12/national-forensic-journal/comment-page-1/#comment-10774 nerdy db8r Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:46:04 +0000 http://www.socal-ld.net/?p=1124#comment-10774 I noticed the inherency arguments especially, too. So, we would cite it just like anyone else? "The 1AR wants us to believe that inherency doesn't matter, but Dr. So-And-So '93 says otherwise! ~read read read~" I recall a small "discussion" on FB regarding inherency being necessary in checking affirmative abuse and being told to "shut up..." Yeah, I can't wait to run I-spec against them, lol. thanks for the hook-up Danny! I noticed the inherency arguments especially, too. So, we would cite it just like anyone else? “The 1AR wants us to believe that inherency doesn’t matter, but Dr. So-And-So ’93 says otherwise! ~read read read~”

I recall a small “discussion” on FB regarding inherency being necessary in checking affirmative abuse and being told to “shut up…” Yeah, I can’t wait to run I-spec against them, lol.

thanks for the hook-up Danny!

]]> By: Danny http://www.socal-ld.net/2009/10/12/national-forensic-journal/comment-page-1/#comment-10773 Danny Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:06:57 +0000 http://www.socal-ld.net/?p=1124#comment-10773 Good question. I think there is a distinction between quoting your coaches and quoting these articles. These are published pieces written by an independent source who has no interest in you winning or losing a debate round. Furthermore, remember that evidence itself means nothing - it's based on the reasoning and persuasiveness of the author. For example, there are some great articles that talk about the burden of inherency. I think any inherency press could benefit from throwing in a theory article or two to explain why the position matters. But of course, you are right, these are just the opinions of the authors. However, many of the authors are highly credible debate theorists with advanced degrees. I imagine your arguments would benefit from their analysis of debate theory. Good question. I think there is a distinction between quoting your coaches and quoting these articles. These are published pieces written by an independent source who has no interest in you winning or losing a debate round. Furthermore, remember that evidence itself means nothing – it’s based on the reasoning and persuasiveness of the author.

For example, there are some great articles that talk about the burden of inherency. I think any inherency press could benefit from throwing in a theory article or two to explain why the position matters.

But of course, you are right, these are just the opinions of the authors. However, many of the authors are highly credible debate theorists with advanced degrees. I imagine your arguments would benefit from their analysis of debate theory.

]]> By: nerdy db8r http://www.socal-ld.net/2009/10/12/national-forensic-journal/comment-page-1/#comment-10772 nerdy db8r Wed, 14 Oct 2009 01:44:07 +0000 http://www.socal-ld.net/?p=1124#comment-10772 I have always wondered how we are supposed to integrate cut theory like these articles.... This is not a scientific study, this is a person's opinion. Can I start quoting my coaches that say my case is topical and use that as a card in my speech? I have always wondered how we are supposed to integrate cut theory like these articles….
This is not a scientific study, this is a person’s opinion.
Can I start quoting my coaches that say my case is topical and use that as a card in my speech?

]]>