Intro to kritiks
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 42

Intro to Kritiks PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 111 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Intro to Kritiks. With help from J. Heidt, Jason Regnier, Dinger, and postmodern clowns everywhere. 2 Parts. How to Sell the K on the Negative Intro to some basic philosophy. The Importance of Framing.

Download Presentation

Intro to Kritiks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Intro to kritiks

Intro to Kritiks

With help from J. Heidt, Jason Regnier, Dinger, and postmodern clowns everywhere.


2 parts

2 Parts

  • How to Sell the K on the Negative

  • Intro to some basic philosophy


The importance of framing

The Importance of Framing

  • Robert Entman writes, “Framing essentially involves selection and salience.  To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described” (1993, 52).

  • How Frames Work: “[They] highlight some bits of information about an item that is the subject of a communication, thereby elevating them in salience.  [Salience] means making a piece of information more noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences.  An increase in salience enhances the probability that receivers will perceive the information, discern meaning and thus process it, and store it in memory” (53).

  • Frames perform 4 primary functions

    • define problems: determine what a causal agent is doing with what costs and benefits, usually measured in terms of common cultural values.

    • diagnose causes: identify the forces creating the problem.

    • make moral judgments: evaluate causal agents and their effects.

    • suggest remedies: offer and justify treatments for the problems and predict their likely effects.

  • Frames have at least 4 locations in the communication process:

    • the communicator: who makes conscious and unconscious framing judgments in deciding what to say and are guided by frames that organize their belief systems.

    • the text: which contains frames, which are manifested by the presence or absence of certain keywords, stock phrases, stereotyped images, sources of information, and sentences that provide thematically reinforcing clusters of facts or judgments.

    • the receiver: who’s thinking is guided by frames, where conclusions may or may not reflect the frames in the text and the framing intention of the communicator

    • the culture: which is the stock of commonly invoked frames; culture  might be defined as the empirically demonstrable set of common frames exhibited in the discourse and thinking of most people in a social grouping


But what does that mean

But what does that mean?

  • How the affirmative describes the world is not objectively true (ie there are other ways to view the world).

  • When debating kritiks, your job is to attach a moral evaluation to their view of the world and present a different vision of reality


Examples of framing 1st 2 nd and one more example for the holiday children

Examples of framing 1st2nd and one more example for the holiday/children


Selling the kritik on the neg 9 components

Selling the kritik on the Neg9 components

  • 1nc

  • Cx

  • Neg Block

  • Framework

  • Impact

  • Alternative

  • Perm

  • Step by Step Preparation

  • Evolution as the season goes on


1 the inc

#1- The INC

  • 1) Organized, Sections Labeled. Accurate numbering and/or lettering

  • 2) Tags and cards not obscenely long

  • 3)Clear Alterative text

  • 4) Variety in the shell

    • Links

    • Impacts

    • Alt

    • Pragmatism Bad/Some framework arg

  • 5) Flexible- should depend on the team and judge

  • 6) Slow down a little


  • Bad tagging

    Bad Tagging

    The affirmative engages in widespread premeditated murder through its use of hierarchal assumptions that reside within the evil structures of capitalism, that will inevitably lead to the destruction of the worker within the nation state and destroy all autonomy within ourselves and our being, which is clearly the zero point of the holocaust and leads to ongoing violence, widespread genocide, and extinction. Our Zizek evidence postdates any of the Zizek evidence and is the deepest philosophical evaluation possible. This supercedes any of their ontological or epistomological questions.


    Better tagging

    Better Tagging

    • By deploying new tech into space to develop R&D and claiming a space weaponization advantage, the affirmative further stratifies government spending makes those in poverty dependent on a cycle of unsustainable capital development. This cycle destroys internal autonomy, furthers imperialism, and will inevitably collapse, causing war and death.


    2 the art of cross x

    #2--The Art of Cross-X

    • Straight forward, specific, deep in the literature, and almost free of jargon. This is key to speaker points. Stand up, clear, confident, using phrases from the evidence, no AT: questions with questions.


    3 the neg block

    #3- The Neg Block

    • 1) win uniqueness (The state is hopelessly broken, Capitalism will destroy us all, Imperialism controls all aspects of US poicy, etc etc)

    • 2) Variety in the neg block. New links, new solvency arguments, new args in response to 2ac arguments (some of these arguments are interchangable. For example you should be using your links to prove the affirmative doesn’t solve).


    Neg block continued

    Neg Block Continued..

    • 3) Please dear god, keep your overviews under control. You are not writing a dissertation on your author or argument. It should be no more than a minute long. Start with “Our k turns and outweighs case because” and then have a number of reasons why this is true. Or start out with a strategic misstep in the 2ac the aff cannot overcome. Keep it short and COVER. Besides, if the 1nc is clear, the thesis statement overview is not as necessary because the judge already got it.


    Still the neg block

    Still the neg block..

    • 4) Block out as much as you can

    • 5) Use 2ac rhetoric against them if possible

      • Pragmatism? Win a case turn

      • Cede the political? What leftist group is coming-leftist politics are a joke- President who is losing a war with a bad economy and shameful torture scandal, still losing

      • Theory args? Do they double turn anything on theory elsewhere?- T responses sometimes? And argue that they beg the question—if you prove the state is bad, then we need to debate the K. Obvi.

      • Not specific enough? Aff responses are laughable and not specific enough either. At least you engage the thesis of the other sides argument. Try to spin your links to be as specific as possible

      • Real World? Assert that your theory of the world is correct. What is the line between phiosophy and policy anyhow? They get to corner the real world marker because their cards have shorter words in them? REMEMBER OUR FRAMING EXAMPLE HERE.

    • 6) Be a bit indignant- call out bad arguments. You really know what you are saying when you get here and can immediately recognize non-responsive arguments .


    4 framework

    #4- Framework

    • 1) Never rely on it to win; judges vote on it less; biggest value is to pressure the 1A. IE-representations come first should never be your only argument.

      • A. Framework arguments are theoretical justifications for your alternative

      • B. Framework arguments can have a middle ground argument that allows the aff to be weighed; ussually the aff will make this. So you should make a “you exclude the K” argument to get back to middle gound claim. (this is why we use our links to prove the aff doesn’t solve, uses constructed threats, etc—to deny the validity of their advantage and impact claims.

    • 2)Having said that, if you do use it, make sure to impact it in the 2nr after the aff screws up

    • 3) Finally, have a block ready to argue that aff choice of the framework is bad—it is about weighing impacts—they are allowed to argue that representations do not come first, they just have to be able to say why.


    5 impacts

    #5- Impacts

    1) Specific turns the case arguments-root cause, makes things worse, SAY WHY

    2) Inevitability, Try or die, extinction is inevitable via a mechanism the aff cannot solve. Example, aff solves asteroids, you try to turn Asteroids with some debris args but also claim the Aff kills the environment and lead to a militarized space race, the aff cannot solve that extinction impact so it helps in case they win some solvency

    3) Examples/empirics- Challenger, Contact movie (SETI), NASA, etc. Examples from current events and the obama administration spin will help you contain aff turns and permutations.

    4) Diversity is key. Goal should be to force the 1ar to drop a major argument every debate and you can start the 2nr with a list of concessions you can impact

    5) You can have D-Rule impacts like “no value to life” or “ontology first” but most judges would rather vote on case turns or K outwieghs the case

    6) Advantage Areas-it is a narrow enough topic that this should be fairly easy to prep vs. specific advantage areas- soft power, hege, terrorism, poverty, asteroids, other diseases, patriarchy, genocide, economy, environment..you should have impact args on all of these.


    6 the alternative

    #6- The Alternative


    The alternative tips

    The Alternative Tips

    • Ideally the alternative should both a) solve your impacts and b) solve the case

      Already mentioned in part:

      1) Prepare CX answers and blocks on key questions like if you defend the existence of the state, what the role of the judge is, if you advocate part of the plan

      2) Framework arguments to protect the alternative

      3) Turns the case or external impacts even if you lose the framework

      4) Tie arguments to a role of the ballot/role of the intellectual argument about acknowleging our own lack of power to enact change. This is how you conflate the alternative with the framework


    Alt tips continued

    Alt tips continued..

    • New:

      5) Create a world in which your alternative makes sense on a policy level ; ie- enacting a social movement’s agenda

      6) More specific alt depending on you k- ie the alternative could be over-identification which does the opposite of the plan, rejection which opens new space for evalutation, etc

      7) Use “even if” statements. “Even if they win the alternative doesn’t solve much, we’ve proven the aff doesn’t do anything except distract us from real solutions. Vote negative on PRESUMPTION.

      8) Never use random crap that you cannot explain,

      9) Always start your alternative text with “Reject the affirmative.” The next sentence should explain what the rejection does/your utopian vision for the alternative/what you’re trying to problematize or rethink. ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWASYS start with “Reject the Aff”.


    7 the perm

    #7 The Perm


    At the perm

    AT: The Perm

    • 1) it still links

    • 2) some theory argument about how if it doesn’t link it has to be severance

    • 3) if they perm more than your alternative, make an intrinsic argument

    • 4) cooption argument. (our links are soo specific it would corrupt the ability of the alternative to solve).

    • 5) no net benefit to the permutation. (since the aff doesn’t even solve, what’s the point of including it with all or part of the alternative).

    • 6 some disad to the perm.


    8 preparation step by step do this and you will win

    #8-Preparation Step by Step: do this and you will win


    Preparation tips

    Preparation Tips

    • 1) Read the whole file

    • 2) Warrants next to the cards

    • 3) 2nc speed drills with the 1nc evidence to learn the cards too

    • 4) CX drills- great for van rides, over dinner

    • 5) Have the 2a give a 2ac on the k. Go home and write blocks to every answer, give the 2nc the next day

    • 6) No ev drill (really hard but great). Against a new 2nc frontline, prep a 2nc where you read tags and cites but DO NOT read the text of the cards. Instead you have to paraphrase the cards in your own words.

    • 7) Pre-round brainstorming-when everything else is ready

      • Link args

      • Examples of recent political relevance- especially related to the case

      • Alt solves the case

      • Follow up in 1AC prep- if you use their cards for links you will sound great.


    9 evolution as the season goes on

    #9- Evolution as the Season goes on


    Tips for evolution

    Tips for Evolution

    • 1) Update with evidence

    • 2) Update with examples

    • 3) Keep your blocks moving

    • 4) Do not lock in- flexible debaters are by far the most dangerous


    Part 2 intro to philosophy

    PART #2- Intro to philosophy


    Vocabulary

    Vocabulary

    Each asks a basic question about the world.

    • Ethics: Most common, asks, “What is right?”

    • Utilitarianism: Greatest good for the greatest number.

    • Deontology: Each person is an end unto his or herself. Someone who really believed in this system of ethics would find the idea of the politics DA abhorrent. Cannot decide to use the people of the harms as a means to preventing a war that is not their fault.

    • Logic: Math people esp. dig this, “What is rational?”

    • Epistemology:“What is knowledge? How is it produced? How do humans learn? For instance, what counts as knowledge in a given field?”

    • Phenomenology: How things are represented in our consciousness, without reference to the status of the object outside ourselves. Will be important to postmodernism in a few minutes. A philosophic movement that originated around the turn of the century.This movement -- like Russell, G. E. Moore, and the analytic movement generally -- insisted on divorcing philosophy from (empirical) psychology. The phenomenologists insisted that philosophers could directly study the pure phenomenon of thought (intensional objects) by a bracketing technique which avoided any commitments about empirical psychology.

    • Metaphysics:“What is it?” Pre-Socratics like Heraclites or Anaximander who thought that there were fundamental substances in the universe like fire, water, nothingness—has now shifted more to questions about the relationship of the self to the world. Metaphysical questions address preexisting truths.

    • Ontology: Scientists cover the atoms and know that fire is not the essential element in the universe so it gives way to questions then of “ontology”- relationships of the self to reality. What is being? “Ontology comes first.” Heidegger


    Postmodernism a new twist or according to father hahn really just hipper deontologists

    Postmodernism: a new twist(or according to Father Hahn-- really just “hipper” deontologists)

    • Postmodernism is a movement of ideas arising from, but also critical of elements of modernism. Because of the wide range of uses of the term, different elements of modernity are viewed as being counterproductive, and different elements of modernity are held to be critiqued.

    • Each of the different usages of 'postmodernism' is also inevitably related to some argument about the nature of knowledge, known in philosophy as epistemology. Individuals who invoke the expression nowadays are implicitly arguing either that there is something fundamentally different about the transmission of meaning; or else that there inheres in modernism certain fundamental flaws in its epistemology.


    Pomo vs modernist

    Pomo vs Modernist

    • The first umpire, a MODERNIST, says, “There are balls and there’s strikes, and I call ‘em the way that they are.

    • The second umpire, a POSTMODERNIST, says, “There’s balls and there’s strikes, and they ain’t nothing until I call ‘em


    Pomo questions the enlightenment

    Pomo questions the enlightenment

    • The enlightenment thinks:

      • We have an accurate representation of reality; objects outside the mind can be seen in a way that is adeqate, accurate, and true. Morever, these representations and their accuracy will progress with science

      • We can use these accurate representations of reality to appropriately manipulate the world in a better vision

      • Those manipulations will lead us inevitably towards progress in science, government, ecology. Enlightenment philosophy and modernism are deeply optimistic about the ability of humanity to make the world better

      • AKA- foundationalism, realism, humanism, enlightenment, modernism


    Post modernists think

    Post-modernists think

    • 1) Representations are never perfect. There is an interaction between seeing and the object. They impact one another


    Postmodernists think

    Postmodernists think

    • 2) There is no objective reality (or if there is we cannot know it and must act like there is not one). We build our notions of the world based on what cultures need. Examples: Masculinity, Hegemony


    Postmodernists think1

    Postmodernists think..,

    • 3) Culture matters. A lot. What is ideology? Communism, socialism, capitalism, etc. Post-modernists think of it a bit differently. For them, they use it to mean the invisible, common sense ways in which we organize the world.

      • Race

      • How we interact daily. The rules of purchasing


    Postmodernists think2

    Postmodernists think..

    • 4) Question the authority of the author. Does it matter what meaning an artist intended for you to see when looking at a painting? What about when you read a poem? Roland Bathes took it all a step further by proclaiming the death of the author. Readers create their own meanings, regardless of the author’s intentions: texts are therefore ever changing, unstable, and open to question.


    Postmodernists think3

    Postmodernists think..

    • 5) Language is a product of culture, not a reflection of reality. Foucault said that we are “governed and paralyzed by language”. One way of getting at ideology is to investigate and study language.


    Postmodernists think4

    Postmodernists think..

    • 6) Language can be broken down for analysis.

      • Signifier—that which carries the meaning (the word or image in our mind)

      • Signified—that to which the signifier refers to. The thing of concept, denoted by the sign

        Signifier- creepy music you hear before the villain attacks in a horror film

        Signified- the cultural meaning that the music carries with it to make you scared

      • Signification is the process that binds the signifier to the signified. A sign must be understood in relation to which has no meaning outside the system of signification. Words do not mean things, people mean things. There is no intrinsic or essential meaning. Only Shared convention.


    Postmodernists think5

    Postmodernists think…

    • 7) Linguistic criticism can be taken a step further

      • Deconstruction- At attack on reason itself. The target is Logocentrism. A deconstructionist thinks language hierarchy can be attacked through attacks on the language system.


    Deconstructionism

    Deconstructionism

    • Question: How many Deconstructionists does it take to screw in a light bulb?


    Answer

    Answer:

    • Even the framing of this question makes a grid of patriarchal assumptions that reveals a slavish devotion to phallocentric ideas - such as, technical accomplishment has inherent value, knowledge can be attained and quantities of labor can be determined empirically, all of which makes a discourse which further marginalizes the already disenfranchised. Obvi.


    So we know what postmodernists don t like what do they actually advocate

    So we know what Postmodernists DON’T like- what do they actually advocate?

    • Part of the problem is Postmodernists are so critical. It is a large field of philosophy. There is not one thing that “postmodernists” advocate.

    • Power is everywhere- Foucault. Power is everywhere and intimately connected to what counts as knowledge. Insanity is a good example.

    • Criticism is action. The process of questioning representation is never ending. People complain that postmodernism has no goal and no end point but postmodernists agree and think that it is CRITICAL to be without a goal. De-naturalizing, or revealing ways in which culture is arbitrary is, in itself, a form of liberation.


    They are nihilists they believe in nothing

    They are nihilists! They believe in nothing!


    Are they actually nihilists

    Are they actually nihilists?

    • Some say postmodernists can have pragmatic value. Even if there is no foundation for knowledge, we can still look at our common history and devise ways to make the world better

    • It is the modernists who are nihilists! Scientific fantasies about progress create the very conditions for continued oppression and war

    • Criticism is in and of itself an end that creates “progress”

    • Who needs a stinking alternative? Only those damn modernists.


    I m so postmodern

    I’m so Postmodern..

    • http://www.flashportal.com/playmovie.php?id=857

      THE END.

      A PMJ production


  • Login