What is "the K"

Author: Trent0405 ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 18
  • Trent0405
    Trent0405 avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 421
    2
    8
    11
    Trent0405 avatar
    Trent0405
    Explain please, I'm so confused.
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,491
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    I dont know, explain where you saw it
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,491
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @Trent0405
    Above
  • Trent0405
    Trent0405 avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 421
    2
    8
    11
    Trent0405 avatar
    Trent0405
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    1 example, on BSH1 vs Virt on does god exist,

    Rashmutu says this 

    “Since Vert makes no arguments against the K”...
    Virt, debate round 2.

    “1. The K
    Con brings an interesting K to the argument. I contend that both the Theistic and Atheistic viewpoints make several predictions about how the world should look like. If Atheism is true, then this is what it should look like; and if Theism is true, this is what it should look like. The Atheist view point, for example, would say that evil is incompatible with Theism and the Theist would say, for example, that objective moral facts can only exist in a Theist-centered world.
    The first argument I brought up, the ontological argument, is an a priori proof of God's existence while the KCA and moral argument are an a posteriori proof of God's existence.
    I propose that we can know God's existence through both pure logic and through empirical evidence. ”

  • Trent0405
    Trent0405 avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 421
    2
    8
    11
    Trent0405 avatar
    Trent0405
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    Also on my debate "Excluding humans, elephants are the best animal"

    Ragnar says:The obvious K comes to mind of proving that elephants are better than humans.
  • Ramshutu
    Ramshutu avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 1,725
    6
    8
    10
    Ramshutu avatar
    Ramshutu
    --> @Trent0405
    Its short for a Kritik.

    Its a debate strategy where the underlying assumptions of a debate resolution are challenged by one side instead of the debate resolution directly.

    For example, if you were debating whether Christianity was a good moral framework, a Kritik would be to argue that the question is nonsensical, as good and bad is meaningless without a moral framework to judge them by.




  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,491
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @Trent0405
    oh,nevermid
  • Trent0405
    Trent0405 avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 421
    2
    8
    11
    Trent0405 avatar
    Trent0405
    --> @Dr.Franklin @Ramshutu
    Thank you.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 301
    Forum posts: 8,991
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    The K is the forbidden technique of the noobsniper. Ramshutu has brought justice to all the K'ers except himself and Ragnar. Oh the K, the Ninja way!

  • Ragnar
    Ragnar avatar
    Debates: 34
    Forum posts: 1,663
    5
    8
    10
    Ragnar avatar
    Ragnar
    --> @Trent0405
    It's short for KFC... It means you think there's a secret ingredient missing. /kidding

    In all seriousness, it's what Ram' said; a Kritik... I should add that it's a pretty varied thing, which is not always done intentionally, but is sometimes done basically as a trolling tactic ('well you haven't proven that Earth exists, so this debate is meaningless!'). So different magnitudes and intents.

    I'll never forget an early debate I did along the lines of 'presuming free will exists, prison is more voluntary than not.' An idiot tried to K it by arguing against free will, which actually left the topical debate itself untouched. ... Not too long ago, I had someone lightly K their own resolution, while having a stipulated rule against K's.
  • Ramshutu
    Ramshutu avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 1,725
    6
    8
    10
    Ramshutu avatar
    Ramshutu
    --> @Trent0405
    What RM means, and is odd as it’s been explained multiple times, is that some Kritiks are good, some are bad.

    Challenging a definition as unfair, and giving key reasons why the definition should not be accepted is a kritik, but normally if we’ll executed is good and reasonable.

    Likewise, a Kritik where you challenge the validity of the assumption: for example that when comparing two things to see which is better, clarifying what better means, and whether better is even possible in context can be good in some cases. A great example is when one side shows A is better than B in some criteria, showing B is better than A using others - then rejecting the possibility of comparison as a result is a kritik, but a good one.

    What often makes a terrible kritik, is when an individual simply unilaterally asserts what the meaning of a word is in some left field way; or decides to make some nonsense semantic point about what “anachronistic means”. When someone does that it is less about engaging in honest debate on a good point, and more trolling. When the individual who kritiks like that does so without justifying why the reasonably interpreted definition should be rejected, the argument fails on burden.

    A good Kritik must justify to the voter why the assumption should be rejected; imo, when the resolution is fully clear, the person doing the Kritik needs to clear that burden. Different definitions or assumptions aren’t rejected just because one side demands it be so.


    Note: while I’ve only seen one good example, this goes for rules too. If people put rules in the debate, they’re all challengeable. If an individual wants a rules to be rejected because they’re unfair, they can challenge it and provide good reason that the rule can be ignored - rather than simply moan about it in the debate.





     

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 301
    Forum posts: 8,991
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    the King of K-ing has spoken.
  • Ramshutu
    Ramshutu avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 1,725
    6
    8
    10
    Ramshutu avatar
    Ramshutu
    Well the difference between my approach to Ks and yours: is that if the resolution was “Ramshutu is the king of Kritiks”.

    My Kritik would be that there were so many types and format of K, pre-fiat, post-fiat, semantic, value based, etc : that it’s not possible to truly ascertain an overall king - as someone who is broadly good at all them, as they are inherently different.

    Your kritik would be “The king chess peice is savagely underpowered, and the Queen is actually the brutally best peice, and as Ramshutu is the best he’s the queen.”

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 301
    Forum posts: 8,991
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    Mhmm, you know exactly what my K would be and what it wouldn't be. You know everything.
  • Ramshutu
    Ramshutu avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 1,725
    6
    8
    10
    Ramshutu avatar
    Ramshutu
    I know an awful lot, us: as you appear to be largely predictable, and this fits your pattern of argument, I think it’s largely fair and accurate.


    It’s not like, say, our Transgender debate when you suggested I would offer an argument that wasn’t “here are all the issues that effect the transgender, and they are worse than the issues that effect the trans ethnic.”

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 301
    Forum posts: 8,991
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    Thanks, everything you say is true. I will be sure to care what you think of me when I finally begin to try as and when I please and garner wins having lowered your aggression against me and increased others underestimation of me to an optimal level to begin tryharding.

    I will like you to observe these 2 debates and see what happens when a whole year of research and adaptation into the userbase here will result in complete decimation of opponents:

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 301
    Forum posts: 8,991
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman

    This one too.
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 11,085
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    --> @Trent0405
    /insert-funny-answer

    it is short for kumbaya, which in the debate means that the beef of the arg was unanswered

    /insert-real-answer

    it is short for kritik