value kill list[1]

8/7/2019 Value Kill List[1]

1/17

Value Kill ListBrought to you by all members and contributors to the Paradigm Reactor

Table of Contents:Value Standards ................................................................................................................... 2 How to go against values ..................................................................................................... 2 Academic Excellence ........................................................................................................... 3 Advancement ....................................................................................................................... 3 Character .............................................................................................................................. 3 Democracy ........................................................................................................................... 3 Economic Welfare ............................................................................................................... 4 Equality ............................................................................................................................... 5 Excellence ............................................................................................................................ 5 General Welfare ................................................................................................................... 5 Global Welfare .................................................................................................................... 6 Happiness ............................................................................................................................ 6 Honor ................................................................................................................................... 7 Human Rights ...................................................................................................................... 7 Individual Rights .................................................................................................................. 8 Justice ................................................................................................................................. 10 Knowledge ......................................................................................................................... 11 Liberty ................................................................................................................................ 11 National Security ............................................................................................................... 12 Progress/Positive Progress ................................................................................................. 13 Prosperity ........................................................................................................................... 14 Quality ................................................................................................................................ 15 Quality of Life .................................................................................................................... 16

Truth ................................................................................................................................... 16 Unity .................................................................................................................................. 17 Victory ............................................................................................................................... 17

1


2/17

Value Standards

Absolute - valued same way by everyone , not dependent upon external conditionsfor existence or for its specific nature

Cant be compromised - what affects does it have when not compromised? Definable - can be totally defined Intrinsic Value - must have good value, doesn't derive it's value from something

else. Something worth achieving Timeline - must be achieved in a reasonable amount of time.

How to go against values1. Redefine opponents value criterion. Does economic liberty mean freedom to

have child labor? Attack opponents value criterion; why economic liberty is bad.2. Divorce VC from V i.e. EL doesnt necessarily lead to ES.3. Show how your value and opponents can both be met. My applications fall within

the value of my opponent, so I win either way.4. Disconnect their value from excellence ("___ doesn't lead to excellence")5. Show how their value doesn't link to the resolution6. "Unless you have my value, you won't be able to handle/enjoy their value"

2


3/17

Academic ExcellenceToo Vague (Varies per person, therefore impossible to value highest)

Advancement

Conservatism. Sometimes we have already achieved something great, and wehave to conserve it rather than keep advancing it. In fact we hope in this roundthat once we achieve our value, we conserve it and keep upholding it.

Not a value. We assume in this round that we are advancing towards our value,thats what upholding a value means, we are advancing towards it. Therefore,by upholding my value, we will be advancing and progressing.

Vague. Technological advancement, social advancement, scientific advancement?

Character

Character is a good thing *to* value, but it isn't a *good* value Too broad, (my value) is achievable and tangible. Character is more than one

value. Relative to culture How do you know that you still have character when you've had to compromise a

virtue or part of your character? (possibly even to protect another aspect of your character)

Characer must be attained before it is good. People of character may make gooddecisions, but they must first get that character. (only use this if you've shown thatcomp. doesn't equal character).

Defined by other values

Democracy1) No Guarantee of a just DemocracyJeff Landauer and Joseph Rowlands , co-author of Importance of Philosophy , and thedesigner of this web site; engineer, specializes in cache coherency, and have about 49(and counting) patents issued, 2001 (Democracy, 2001,http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Bloody_Democracy.html)Democracy is rule by the majority. There are no limits to what the majority is allowed todecide. It can decide to pass laws based on a whim, with no respect for rights. It can passlaws against painting your house white as easy as it can pass laws against murder.

Who is to say that the people will always decide to pass laws that help society instead of take away from it? If the governments ruling is always only what the people want done,anything can happen and any laws can be passed.

3


4/17

2) Minorities SufferJeff Landauer and Joseph Rowlands , co-author of Importance of Philosophy , and thedesigner of this web site; engineer, specializes in cache coherency, and have about 49(and counting) patents issued, 2001 (Democracy, 2001,http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Bloody_Democracy.html)

Those that suffer the most under a democracy are the minorities. The smaller the group,the less say they have in government. But majority and minority change with each issueor policy. Everyone finds themselves as part of the minority at some point. But since the majority rule, the government has no fear of rebellion to hold them accountable for their actions. Democracy unfettered means the minority can become the prey of the majority.

3) Unlimited PowerSamuel L. Blumenfeld , Author of books on education in the US, graduated from TheCity College of New York edited the Universal Library at Grosset & Dunlap, 2006 (WhyDemocracy is Bad, 2006 ,http://atangledweb.typepad.com/weblog/2006/02/why_democracy_i.html)

In a pure democracy, the majority has the power to destroy a minority. That's whathappened in Germany in 1933 when the majority voted Hitlers National Socialist Partyin. Hitler then consolidated his power into the Nazi dictatorship with its deranged racismand plans for world domination. Hitler stated all of this in his own book, "Mein Kampf,"which any German could have read. At first German Jews assumed that Hitler would notlast long. The Nazi movement was so much against basic German traditions of culturaland religious tolerance. But they were wrong. And now among Palestinians, 60 yearsafter Hitler, we have the same situation. A political party, Hamas, determined to wipeIsrael off the map, has acquired political power through the democratic vote. This is puredemocracy, unfettered by any constitutional limitations.

4) The United States is not a DemocracyConsider the words of Robert Welch speaking of the nature of the United States ... "Thisis a republic, not a democracy, let's keep it that way." The difference between a republicand a democracy lies in the ultimate source of official power. In the case of a republic, itlies with a charter; in a democracy, power lies with the rule of the majority. In this way,Democracy makes laws for the "greater good" of all people, occasionally abolishingpersonal rights in doing so. A republic must abide by the limits set in the constitutionwritten.

5) Democracy is only as good as its ConstitutionThe idea of democracy might be good, but if the rules it follows are corrupted or in other ways inapplicable, the democracy is no longer legitimate. If old baking powder is used toback a cake, the cake will not rise. We must have a sound constitution to build upon if wehope to accomplish a sturdy democracy.

Economic WelfareSlavery was valuing Economic Welfare

4


5/17

Equality

Unachievable Inherent inequality-- people are born with different abilities/handicaps Equality means nothing without another value being represented first and

foremost. For example, you can kill everyone, which is treating them all the same,but you are neglecting life.

Socialist/communist governments value equality Valuing equality higher thananything else has been historically proven to lead to disastrous results [JonesTown, Communism, tax reforms, etc]

Countered by need for authority

Excellence

People can excel in virtually anything (i.e. Drug Dealing) Too Vague, we can not discuss everything that is excellence (No boundaries, can

be good or bad) Too broad. We cant possibly talk about everything in this debate round, we need

a more narrow value so that we can focus our argumentation in one or two areas.

General Welfare1. Vagueness: No Brightline

With Definitions like "good for all" or "all things morally right," We don't reallyknow what it consists of.

2. Multiple Values : (Opponent will "subsume" your value)

The opponent basically comes up and says that your value is included in theirs; thatif the judge votes for them, they'll get your value "and all the other good ones." {Reallyannoying btw}

Response: This really leaves no ground for me to defend my value and have a goodvalue debate. (This is killer because lots of parent & alumni judges really focus on the"value debate"!!) You can also point out that this proves that General Welfare is made upof multipile values and that you get General Welfare by valuing them.

3. Unachievable/Utilitarian (Limits potential for others)Response: "Unless my opponent has somehow discovered the ultimate utopian

society, people will always push others down and decrease their 'welfare' in order to

increase their own 'welfare' therefore making General Welfare impossible. Someone mustdo the 'dirty jobs.'" Basically an attempt to create general welfare for everyone,communism took the upper class and decreased their welfare in order to try and increasethe welfare of the lower class. What promotes my General Welfare, may not further yours. This leads to totalitarianism, the greatest good for the greatest number of people.This sounds good but leads to old people dying so that young, thriving people can receivefaster care in the emergency room. This was Stalins philosophy, eliminate the few week so the many strong can flourish. This is an evil philosophy. General welfare looks at the

5


6/17

ideas of only the majority of the group, because of this, it compromises the ideas of eachindividuals form of happiness. For example, when Hitler came into power the majoritythat followed him saw their idea of happiness as favorable but the minorities form of casewas unfavorable. In the end not everyone gets the general welfare they specifically wantor define. Basically the majority wins instead of the minority no matter which is right.

4. General welfare is a short-sighted goal .Chris Dodd , United States Connecticut Senator, 2010 . (Dodd Holds Hearing to Addressthe Foreclosure Crisis Chris Dodd United States Senator for Connecticuthttp://dodd.senate.gov/?q=node/4804).The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, as well as other government regulated loans to low income badcredit borrowers, is an example of how when the government seeks general welfare, theoutcome can be harmful. The Act sought to give home loans to low-income neighborhoods, whichlowered the tax lending standards on homes. Although this seemed like a good idea at first, the low-incomefamilies started buying expensive homes with their loans and were not able to pay them back. Senator ChrisDodd of Connecticut response to what caused the current economic crisis was quote A lot of badmortgages or a lot of bad securitized debt thats out there. The root cause of this is the housing foreclosure

crisis. As we can see bad government regulations for tax lending standards fueled thehousing bubble and caused the sub-prime mortgage crisis. In the end the pursuit of general welfare caused economic harm.

5. General welfare is not immutable, it changes overtimeThe definition of "General Welfare" changes over time, which can be irrelevant indifferent eras. Insurance programs like Medicare/Medicaid or Social Security never existed (even as ideas) in the late 18th century. Technology and social philosophy changeover time. What might have been considered a good way of treating patients in the15th century, would now be considered archaic. The exact definition of general welfarefor everyone may now be inappropriate, or worse, incorrect in the future.

6/Impact:The Proper place for General Welfare is a side effect (additional outcome), not thehighest goal for the above reasons:

Global Welfare

Unattainable Uncontrollable What is "Good" for everybody? Many teams will only talk about the civilized world. In that case, bring up "the

rest of the world".

Happiness

Not important Enough, not highest value Happiness is Conditional Relative, not absolute Undefinable, unattainable

6


7/17

HonorNot as important as Human Life, Survival, etc - examples: Hiroshima/Nagasaki,Guantanamo Interrogation Tactics

Human Rights1. Internal Conflict

a) Abortion (Life vs Liberty)b) Flag Burning (Liberty vs. Honor)c) Fred Phelps, Westboro Baptist Church-Their free speech rights came into conflict

with the rights of a grieving military family. People dont agree on the definition of Human Rights in each situation. What Human Rights are, is not even agreed upon evenhere in the US.

2. Relative to JudgmentNo clear definition. When does a baby have the right to life and when does the

mother have the freedom to get an abortion? The constant debates about this subjectin America prove that there is no clear definition. Gay marriage is another example wherethe right to liberty is not clearly defined, and states disagree.

Everybody has different ideas because they come from different families, belief systemsetc.

Impact: People may have bad judgement (politiciansindividuals in society)

3. Relative to LawTexas (robberies)Death Penalty differences between states (CA has capital punishment, MA doesn't)Subject to Judgement of Lawmakers

4. Relative to CultureIslam: Quran (Male authority over women) The Quran of Islam states that a man can

beat his wife if she disobeys him. Obviously these are not the same freedoms that womenenjoy here in America.

Rifqa Bary - "Rifqa confirmed to ABC's Orlando affiliate WFTV that she believedher father would kill her. 'They have to kill me because I'm a Christian. It's an honor [killing]. If they love me more than God, then they have to kill me,' sheexplained." http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=8303567&page=1

5. Must be CompromisedHiroshima/Nagasaki (Innocent citizens suffered for the HR of others)GITMOTorture (Water-boarding)

(If they say that it was compromised to save a greater ratio of people than are beingkilled, ask how big of a ratio is needed-and who decides it. Should we sacrifice 10 peopleto save 1,000? What about 1 person to save 3?)

7


8/17

6. Multiple ValuesProvides Negative with "less ground"...Lincoln-Douglas is a Value debate (one value

vs. one value)No end to adding values.

Individual Rights1) Individual Rights are the right to do anything and everything you want withyourself. These rights only exist in a state of nature (an absence of government or society) because they are purely relating to a single human being. However, IndividualRights in the state of nature had three problems: misperception of natural law, lack of objective arbiters, and inequalities of strength. To solve these three problems, "IndividualRights" were deserted for Citizen's Rights.

2) Through the Social Contract, Individual Rights are transformed into Citizen'sRights. The Individual delegates the absolute right of self-preservation and the absoluteright of taking out punishment on others to the government, which in turn provides for

the just, impartial protection of the Citizen's property. Society provides a set standard for perception of natural law. Objective arbiters are put into place in a governments judicialbranch. Finally, restraints are put into place to protect the weak and helpless.

3) Because these "Rights" are delegated to the government, they don't disappear .The government and society now protect your person, provide justice for crimes, andprotect the property of citizens.

In conclusion, Individual Rights are left behind in the state of nature when the individualjoins a society and is provided with a better alternative, Citizen's Rights.

---

1) Individual Rights are UndefinableNo matter how hard we try, a universal definition or understanding of Individual Rightscannot be found. Even the idea of Liberty, a parallel idea to a right has caused muchconfusion over the years. To illustrate, pay heed to the words of President Lincoln:The world has never had a good definition of the word liberty, and the Americanpeople, just now, are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty, but in using thesame word, we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty means for each man to do as he pleases with himself and the product of his labor; while with othersthe same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the

products of other men's labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible thingscalled by the same name liberty. It follows that each of the things is, by the perceptiveparties, called by two different and incompatible names liberty and tyranny.

- President Abraham Lincolnhttp://www.dailypaul.com/node/9005Accessed on 8.22.10

8


9/17

2) Individual Rights are RelativeUN Declaration of Human RightsArticle 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.Article 16. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have theright to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and atits dissolution.

Article 21.(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosenrepresentatives.(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed inperiodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secretvote or by equivalent free voting procedures.Article 22. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization,through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization andresources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the freedevelopment of his personality.Article 23.(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work

and to protection against unemployment.(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and hisfamily an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of socialprotection.(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.Article 24. Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours andperiodic holidays with pay.Article 25. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and theright to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.Article 26. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary andfundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shallbe made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

3) QuranThe Koran establishes the superiority of Men over Women and allows a husband theIslamic equivalent of Marital Abuse, a serious crime in the western world."Men are superior to women on account of the qualities with which God has gifted theone above the other.chide those for whose [disobedience] you have cause to fear;remove them into beds apart, and scourge themGod is High, [God is] Great!"(Rodwell's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)

In 1879, law scholar Nicholas St. John Green wrote, "The cases in the American courtsare uniform against the right of the husband to use any [physical] chastisement, moderateor otherwise, toward the wife, for any purpose." Green also cites the 1641 Body of Liberties of the Massachusetts Bay colonists - one of the first legal documents in NorthAmerican history - as an early de jure condemnation of violence by either spouse.

---

9


10/17

People generally assume that Individual Rights are the rights to Life, Liberty, and thepursuit of Happiness. As we can see from the definitions, individual rights are things that a person is entitled to because they are a person. This overlaps with the rights to Life,Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, but more generally includes rights to free speech,free assembly, free movement, health, and others.

1. Self-DestructiveThe free exercise of any one individual's rights necessitates an infringement of an other's.For instance, my right to freedom of movement includes my right to move where, whenand as fast as I want. By using this right and driving very quickly through a residentialarea, I endanger other's rights to life, free movement, and safety. The complete exerciseof just one of my rights as an individual compromises many in return. One individual'srights destroy another's rights as they are exercised, and I would argue that IndividualRights, as a whole, are self-destructive.

2. Divisive

Thomas Hobbes, in his book Leviathan, postulates that the reason governments areformed is to protect its citizens from hurting each other as they pursue their own desires.Citizens limit the use of their individual rights to live without fear of other people.Individual rights are divisive because they elevate the good of the individual above thegood of the group. Unlimited use of individual rights hinders the governmentsresponsibility to protect its citizens, and as a result, divides the community.

Journalist Robert J. Samuelson has said "We face a choice between a society wherepeople accept modest sacrifices for a common good or a more contentious society wheregroup selfishly protect their own benefits."

Justice1) Different StandardsDifferent cultures have different standards of Justice - Different cultures have differentforms of punishment they use for crimes (For example, the act of adultery may lose onetheir job/reputation in the U.S. whereas it may get one stoned to death Middle Easterncountries), which of these is 'right'? We cant ever know who is right and what is trueJustice.

2) Justice is IndefinableJustice is not something that one can define, therefore it cannot carry weight in the roundas a value.

Edmond Nathaniel Cahn, expert on jurisprudence, wrote in The Sense of Injustice (1949)Justice is impossible to define. It's an idea rather than a concept that people can agreeon. Justice, as opposed to being something tangible, is more abstract and unattainable.You can never come to an absolute model.

3) Justice for whom?Everyone, even here in America, has different ideas on what is or is not just, therefore,we can not know who is right. Take, for example, the controversy over abortion. Some

10


11/17

think it is their just due to be able to have an abortion should there be an unplannedpregnancy. Others think it is unjust to dispense of innocent unborn children. In this case,who gets their idea of justice? Do we uphold justice for the mother, or for the child?The pro-choice national website states about abortion, It is also available thanks to allthose working to ensure safe, legal, and accessible abortion care to promote health and

justice [emphasis added] for women. Yet John Ollason, a professor of ecology atUniversity of Aberdeen, Scotland, writes, Abortion may be expedient, but it is never just.

4) Who administers justice?There is no way to determine who administers justice, since everyones idea of justicediffers from another. There is going to be a bias, no matter who it is. Who administersjustice? Your next-door-neighbor? The court? The government? The government is notalways right. The court is not always right. Your next-door-neighbor is not always right.Humans are fallible. They deserve justice, yet how can they reliably dish out justice whenthey themselves are not always right? They cant.

Knowledge

It changes, its relative. What may be known now, may be proven false later.(Climategate) Theres not a limit, you cant ever really achieve it.

Even increasing knowledge isn't inherently good

Liberty1) Liberty is vague.The definition of Liberty does not specify what control we are free from. This is harmfulbecause it gives us the freedom to disobey God, our parents or whoever we want to, thusleading to chaos. If Liberty is valued to the ultimate we wont know what we are valuing.

Liberty, equality - bad principles! The only true principle for humanity is justice; andjustice to the feeble is protection and kindness.- Henri-Frdric Amiel

Impact: If you vote for Liberty, you wont know what you are valuing.

2) Liberty needs limits.Liberty needs limits because when everyone has unlimited liberty it can lead to anarchy.If Liberty is the highest value it leads to events like the French Revolution. The foundingFathers listed Life before Liberty in the Declaration of Independence because theyrealized that limited Liberty is better.Too much liberty corrupts us all.- Terence Roman playwright and philosopher The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not theincrease of it." - Woodrow WilsonThe natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.Thomas Jefferson

11


12/17

The object and practice of liberty lies in the limitation of government power. GeneralDouglas MacArthur

Impact: Unlimited liberty brings down government, so the _____ is beingnonresolutional.

3) Liberty ultimately leads to anarchy.Liberty leads to anarchy because when everyone has freedom from restraint then chaosreigns. For example if there were no restraints for drivers then there would be a multitudeof crashes. For instance in South America they feel at liberty to disobey traffic laws. Andthe result According to official statistics, over 5,000 people die in traffic accidents inColumbia#Impact: Anarchy is not a legitimate form of government, thus the_____ is not fulfillingthe resolution.

National Security No intrinsic value - it gets value protecting OTHER values If valued too highly it can violate certain human rights [Patriot Act] "Those who would give up liberty for a little partial security deserve neither

liberty nor security." Unattainable, idealistic Value (never completely achieved) Not the most important value. Some things are worth risking your life for, like

your family or your country. Not the most important value. Some things are worth risking your life for, like

your family or your country.

Not personable. This isnt a value for you and me. How can we protect nationalsecurity, without joining the military or navy? Achieved wrongly. Bombing all of our enemies would make us safe but would be

evil.

1) Harms the rights of the individualAn over emphasis on national security damages the freedoms of the everyday citizen thatreally matter.Example: Alien and Sedition Acts. Passed in 1794, a set of bills, that made it a crimeto publish false, scandalous, and malicious writing (2) against the government or of itsofficials. At that time the government was locking up any citizens at spoke out against

the government in fear of a breach of national security.One incident in involved a lawyer named Thomas Cooper, an editor of a newspaper, wasfined and sent to prison for writing an article accusing John Adams of bias towardsBritain. (3)Impact: By placing National Security as the value in todays debate round, we arepurchasing Security, for the liberties of the individual.

12


13/17

2) Restricts the rights of groups of people.What is the end goal of national security? To protect the people.But if we uphold security as our highest value, we are sacrificing the freedom of thepeople for our supposed security.

Example: (From the U.S. department of the interior) Japanese American Concentrationcamps. In 1942, the United States government ordered more than 110,000 JapaneseAmerican men, women, and children to leave their homes and detained them in remote,military-style camps. There were in all ten camps where Japanese American citizens andresident Japanese aliens were interned during World War II. (4)The U.S. government was so worried about Japanese spies; anyone who even lookedJapanese was moved to a concentration camp.Impact: By putting security before the good the people, we are compromising the veryfoundations that America was founded on.

3) An over emphasis on National security harms immigration.

America at its very roots is a land of opportunity, but it is folly to shut our selves off tothe rest of the world.Examples: Countries like North Korea guard their boarders with barbed wire, andconcrete walls; severely restricting the movement of the people wanting out of thecountry, and the people wanting into the country. (5)Impact:1) This harms the rights and freedoms of the countries citizens.2) This harms the foreign relations of the countries.

Progress/Positive Progress1. Progress is Defined by Other Values

The only way we can determine what progress is is looking at the outcome, thevalue.

a. Progression toward something [My Value]b. No Intrinsic Value: Progress is a means not an endc. For these reasons, Can't be the Highest Value in the round.

Link to the Resolution and explain that we have to show one value as thehighest

2. Relative: Progress of Whom, of What, in What Direction.Relative to judgment: People think what they're doing is "good" or in the "right"

direction.

APP. Adolf Hitler - Hitler thought he was doing the "best" thingmakingprogress for the Aryan Race by eliminating the Jews, Gypsies, Disabledetc. 3. The Progressive Era 1900-1920

Progressives valued "Progress" so much that the overall morality (education,religion) actually regressed.

13


14/17

Were the technological, medicinal, agricultural advances worth the cost of BIGgovernment? Founding Fathers set up a limited Gov, but Progressives pushed to make thegovernment big enough to solve all their problems.

Progressives believed that they could sole all of mankind's problems by themselves.That better schools, tech., living conditions, etc would lead them to a utopia.

APP: Socialism - Former Head of the American Railway Union Eugene Debs was atthe forefront of the progressive era advocating socialism as the ultimate goal we shouldbe progressing towards.

APP: 18th Amendment (Prohibition) - Social Workers/Christians/Moral People Sawwhat alcoholism did to americas. They decided to take the issue into their own hands andpassed the 18th amendment (Which they thought was progress). But the rest of americawasn't too fond of the idea (took away their liberty), and eventually the 18th amd. wasrepealed.

APP: Industrial Revolution - Although the Industrial Revolution was a time of greatprogress, when people put that opportunity and progress above Human Beings, therewere gave consequences. An example of this is child labor, where children were worked

long hours for little pay.

4. Progress is not always straight-forwardProgress is not a definite thing. Often progressing in one direction undermines a

nation as a whole.C. S. Lewis once said, We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progressmeans doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man whoturns back soonest is the most progressive.Impact: When a government focuses on progressing rather than the will of its people itwill violate the will of the people to achieve this progress.

5. Turn: Progress is a often a smokescreen for evilWriter Stanislaw Lem made this query: "Is it progress if a cannibal uses a knife and

fork?"Application: The government has drafted laws that require many hospitals to do abortionsor risk being closed. This supposed progress is repugnant because it limits both the rightof the hospitals to make their own choices and because it destroys the life of the unbornchild. This is done in the name of medical progress.Impact: investigative journalist Russell Baker came to an important conclusion when hesaid: "Usually, terrible things that are done with the excuse that progress requires themare not really progress at all, but just terrible things."

Prosperity1. Prosperity is vague. Prosperity is vague because the definition includes extremelyunclear words and is easily interpreted in completely different ways. For example, thewords good fortune can take on many different forms.Prosperity conflicts

14


15/17


16/17

Opponent Argument: The market forces us to comparison shopResponse: There are several flaws in this argument. First, the market does not in fact

"force" anyone to do "comparison shopping." If you genuinely don't care much about theprice or quality of a particular product, you can simply choose at random from theoptions on sale. ILYA Somin, Associate Professor of Law, George Mason University

School of Law Opponent Argument: There are different choices of Pepsi flavors. In instances like that it doesnt matter if quality is relative.

Response: Thats not really choice. Choice would be between Coke and Pepsi.

Quality of Life1. Relative to Each Person's Judgment (Not Absolute)

APPsa) Middle Age Monks: Intentional Decrease of "Quality of Life"

[If they say"well that was their idea of Q of L"that just makes your caseall the more]

b) Euthanasia. If we value Quality of Life above any other Value (LD VALUEDebate), then logically, when we have a situation (Teri Schaivo) where someone has"bad" quality of life, it would be better to terminate that life that to leave it in a "bad"state.

c) Mentally Ill/Special Needs/Disabled

2. Undefinable: When do we achieve "Q-L?"

3. When valued highest, Quality of Life can lead to:

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Frequently Asked Questions, by Rita L. Marker andKathi Hamlonhttp://www.internationaltaskforce.org/faq.htm

1) Within two years after the passage of Oregon's assisted suicide law, a model lawwas drafted that would have given doctors the right to provide assisted suicide if "thepatient has a terminal illness or an intractable and unbearable illness."(25)

2) A 1995 article in the journal, Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, concluded thatsuicide is a rational choice for those with "hopeless conditions." As defined, "Hopelessconditions include, but are not necessarily limited to terminal illnesses, severe physicaland/or psychological pain, physically or mentally debilitating and/or deterioratingconditions, or quality of life no longer acceptable to the individual."(26)

Truth

No tangible impact/importance to the real world Truth can't be categorized as "good" OR "bad" Truth is relative (Changes)each person has a different idea of what constitutes

"Truth" Weak Value

16


17/17

Means to an end

Unity

No intrinsic value impossible - not everyone will always agree on important issues [Civil War -

States Rights/Slavery]

Victory

"If winning is the highest value then you shouldn't vote in this round because oneof us would have to lose"

No intrinsic value

17

value kill list[1]

Documents