Koslow,+Scott

Scott Koslow
Debate means something.

Yes, it's a game, but it's an amazing game through which we are able to create something for ourselves, and which some of us invest a lot into. It's up to you to create that meaning, and if you can and you convey that passion, you'll do well in front of me.

My background is in critical arguments (particularly Nietzsche), but I'll try and let you create this debate space as you want, to the best of my ability, and I've voted on topicality or "realism is inevitable" as much as I have on Heidegger (probably more).

In front of me, just make sure you tell me why your argument matters. If you have a critique, perform it, sing it, read it to me, just tell me the role of my ballot and why that matters. Same if you are reading a CP/DA or theory arguments.

Most of the nitty-gritty of debate is, in my mind, theory arguments about what debate should look like: Should it focus on ethics over cost-benefit analysis? Does the affirmative have to endorse government action? Should we focus on how we as individuals can engage in politics? My biggest problem with theory is when people tell me it's a "voter for fairness and education" or "you have a moral obligation to ..." without explaining what that means or why that matters. What kind of debate does the other side produce, and why is that bad? Is topicality an expression of ressentiment? Do we need to learn about the intricacy of policy analysis so that we can become responsible citizens? Will unfair debate lead to stale and unenjoyable debate?

It's up to you to make debate what you want, and I hope you do. Just explain why I should drink the cool aide, too.