Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

What is a kritiks?

ThinkBig
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?
ThinkBig
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notable Notes and Quotable Quotes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I GOT SIG'D"
"WELL FVCK ME IN THE A$SHOLE AND CALL ME A CUCK I GOT SIG'D AGAIN"
-Kiri
If anyone's getting modkilled, it's kiri. Just for his sig.
-7th
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge or vote? Nominate me!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
lannan13
Posts: 23,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 3:43:52 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

https://en.wikipedia.org...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 3:48:02 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

Check out these links, they answer your question well:

https://debate.uvm.edu...

https://debate.uvm.edu...
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"
Tsar of DDO
ThinkBig
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!
ThinkBig
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notable Notes and Quotable Quotes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I GOT SIG'D"
"WELL FVCK ME IN THE A$SHOLE AND CALL ME A CUCK I GOT SIG'D AGAIN"
-Kiri
If anyone's getting modkilled, it's kiri. Just for his sig.
-7th
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge or vote? Nominate me!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lexus
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

If we take the resolution "we should not force the North to return slaves to the South", one would make the argument that any institution of slavery is bad, so even if the affirmative is a good idea, it isn't good enough because it still subscribes to a terrible mindset that allows for the atrocities of slavery to happen.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:07:31 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

You are a terrible debater and every K I have ever seen you write has been terrible, so, idk why you think you have any insight on the matter.

And K's are not useful, in any respect, other than to defeat the purpose and spirit of debate. They are essentially "middle fingers" to the practice, which is why they are nearly universally frowned upon, and debaters who make a habit of using them are frequently the subject of mockery and jeers behind their backs.
Tsar of DDO
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:11:25 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

If we take the resolution "we should not force the North to return slaves to the South", one would make the argument that any institution of slavery is bad, so even if the affirmative is a good idea, it isn't good enough because it still subscribes to a terrible mindset that allows for the atrocities of slavery to happen.
+1 and thanks for a full description of a kritik and its purpose.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:12:35 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:11:25 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

If we take the resolution "we should not force the North to return slaves to the South", one would make the argument that any institution of slavery is bad, so even if the affirmative is a good idea, it isn't good enough because it still subscribes to a terrible mindset that allows for the atrocities of slavery to happen.
+1 and thanks for a full description of a kritik and its purpose.

That was not a description, full or otherwise.
Tsar of DDO
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:13:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I don't really fully understand it so I try to have more conventional arguments when I accept those debates. Such as I wonder if I avceptedna debate on the death penalty if I could argue that the death penalty has an 80% approval rating so society would be happier and therefore better off if we kept the death penalty.

Would something like that be a Kritik? It doesn't seem to challenge and underlying assumption in the resolution does it?
ThinkBig
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:14:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:13:07 AM, Wylted wrote:
I don't really fully understand it so I try to have more conventional arguments when I accept those debates. Such as I wonder if I avceptedna debate on the death penalty if I could argue that the death penalty has an 80% approval rating so society would be happier and therefore better off if we kept the death penalty.

Would something like that be a Kritik? It doesn't seem to challenge and underlying assumption in the resolution does it?

I don't think that would be a kritik rather than an argumentum ad populum fallacy.
ThinkBig
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notable Notes and Quotable Quotes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I GOT SIG'D"
"WELL FVCK ME IN THE A$SHOLE AND CALL ME A CUCK I GOT SIG'D AGAIN"
-Kiri
If anyone's getting modkilled, it's kiri. Just for his sig.
-7th
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge or vote? Nominate me!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:16:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:14:36 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:13:07 AM, Wylted wrote:
I don't really fully understand it so I try to have more conventional arguments when I accept those debates. Such as I wonder if I avceptedna debate on the death penalty if I could argue that the death penalty has an 80% approval rating so society would be happier and therefore better off if we kept the death penalty.

Would something like that be a Kritik? It doesn't seem to challenge and underlying assumption in the resolution does it?

I don't think that would be a kritik rather than an argumentum ad populum fallacy.

It certainly would not be an argumentum ad populum because the argument is about overall happyness level not stating it is correct merely because people like it
Lexus
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:16:12 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:07:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

You are a terrible debater and every K I have ever seen you write has been terrible, so, idk why you think you have any insight on the matter.

And K's are not useful, in any respect, other than to defeat the purpose and spirit of debate. They are essentially "middle fingers" to the practice, which is why they are nearly universally frowned upon, and debaters who make a habit of using them are frequently the subject of mockery and jeers behind their backs.

Not sure why these personal attacks are necessary or relevant ... in HS and collegiate debate, kritiks are not something looked down upon, except by a very select few. In HS US debate, a team that uses Kritiks to attack racism within the debate space, Little Rock Central WW, was in the finals of the biggest tournament of the year.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:17:58 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:16:12 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:07:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

You are a terrible debater and every K I have ever seen you write has been terrible, so, idk why you think you have any insight on the matter.

And K's are not useful, in any respect, other than to defeat the purpose and spirit of debate. They are essentially "middle fingers" to the practice, which is why they are nearly universally frowned upon, and debaters who make a habit of using them are frequently the subject of mockery and jeers behind their backs.

Not sure why these personal attacks are necessary or relevant ... in HS and collegiate debate, kritiks are not something looked down upon, except by a very select few. In HS US debate, a team that uses Kritiks to attack racism within the debate space, Little Rock Central WW, was in the finals of the biggest tournament of the year.

You are vastly mistaken, and the fact that one team in one (very small) tournament that isn't even a big hit on the circuit had a fluke result once does not indicate a broader trend.
Tsar of DDO
Lexus
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:20:08 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:17:58 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:16:12 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:07:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

You are a terrible debater and every K I have ever seen you write has been terrible, so, idk why you think you have any insight on the matter.

And K's are not useful, in any respect, other than to defeat the purpose and spirit of debate. They are essentially "middle fingers" to the practice, which is why they are nearly universally frowned upon, and debaters who make a habit of using them are frequently the subject of mockery and jeers behind their backs.

Not sure why these personal attacks are necessary or relevant ... in HS and collegiate debate, kritiks are not something looked down upon, except by a very select few. In HS US debate, a team that uses Kritiks to attack racism within the debate space, Little Rock Central WW, was in the finals of the biggest tournament of the year.

You are vastly mistaken, and the fact that one team in one (very small) tournament that isn't even a big hit on the circuit had a fluke result once does not indicate a broader trend.

Are you a troll? Little Rock Central WW is one of the best teams on the national circuit, has won something like 7 bids to the TOC when you only need 1 or 2 to qualify ... the TOC is literally the most prestigious tournament in the United States and it even has some international competition ...

And I'm pretty sure that in terms of numbers, the TOC is the biggest tournament, they had some 400 people competing in policy debate alone...
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 4:33:32 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 4:17:58 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:16:12 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:07:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 4:01:54 AM, Lexus wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:55:23 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:53:05 AM, YYW wrote:
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A "kritik" (or "k" for short) is what--usually dumb--people do in response to resolutions they don't like. Essentially, it's an argument as to why we cannot debate the resolution, rather than an actual argument with respect to the resolution.

Example:

Resolved: "Black people like watermelon."

A "k" of this resolution would ring to the tune of "WE CANNOT DEBATE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD BE TO PERPETUATE RACIAL STEREOTYPES!!!!"

Thank you!

Kritiks are massively useful, he is misrepresenting the use of them on this site. This site has terrible choices in K's, but elsewhere they are very important (real life debate), because they allow us to understand the assumptions that others have and why they are bad.

You are a terrible debater and every K I have ever seen you write has been terrible, so, idk why you think you have any insight on the matter.

And K's are not useful, in any respect, other than to defeat the purpose and spirit of debate. They are essentially "middle fingers" to the practice, which is why they are nearly universally frowned upon, and debaters who make a habit of using them are frequently the subject of mockery and jeers behind their backs.

Not sure why these personal attacks are necessary or relevant ... in HS and collegiate debate, kritiks are not something looked down upon, except by a very select few. In HS US debate, a team that uses Kritiks to attack racism within the debate space, Little Rock Central WW, was in the finals of the biggest tournament of the year.

You are vastly mistaken, and the fact that one team in one (very small) tournament that isn't even a big hit on the circuit had a fluke result once does not indicate a broader trend.

"In general, kritiks have been universally accepted in National Circuit (Tournament of Champions) debate and most inter-collegiate policy debate, and less accepted in particular regions of National Forensic League debate, especially by new, or "lay" judges. It is unclear whether this is due to a problem intrinsic to the structure of the kritik, or simply poor explanation. Kritiks are also increasingly popular in the National Parliamentary Debate Association. They have even begun to be used in the lay-judge dominated International Public Debate Association, using a more easy-to-understand articulation of the basic kritik structure." [https://en.wikipedia.org...]
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 10:46:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/6/2016 3:28:28 AM, ThinkBig wrote:
I've seen several debates that have a rule of no kritiks. What exactly is this?

A kritik is fundamentally an argument used to criticize the resolution--in other words, it is an argument that links to the resolution, but is entirely non-unique regardless of that (i.e. the same text applies to multiple scenarios). It criticizes an assumption that the resolution makes. For example, in the resolution "justice requires the recognition of animal rights," a kritik would say "there are no existent rights of anyone in the world, so justice doesn't require the recognition of any rights, including animal rights." Another form of kritik is one that says the resolution should not be debated, either because (1) to debate the resolution would have some form of harm (which makes for typically absurd K's, as YYW correctly pointed out) or (2) the resolution is structured in such an abusive, one-sided way it isn't debatable (e.g. "humans are under the kingdom Animalia," or "light is not matter" -- in both these cases, assuming Pro created the resolution, Con can say "since the resolutions are truisms, there's no negative ground in the debate, which is harmful to the concept of debate and abusive to me, so vote Pro down to show them that they can't do this.").
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass