Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Zainab Gilani (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Kana Shoji (Shorin Global)

Judge: Min Seob Lee (Kyunghee University)

Resolution: THBT: An overriding ethical obligation to protect and preserve extraterrestrial microbial life and ecosystems should be incorporated into international law.

  • Zainab Gilani
    Zainab Gilani
    vs.



    Kana Shoji
    Kana Shoji
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 18, 2016 11:57:36PM EST by Zainab Gilani

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 19, 2016 10:35:00AM EST by Kana Shoji

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 21, 2016 02:34:13AM EST by Zainab Gilani

    Citations

    Show

    United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs,
    "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies", April 14, 2016, http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html

    Posted at April 21, 2016 11:30:33AM EST by Kana Shoji

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 23, 2016 02:39:52AM EST by Zainab Gilani

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 24, 2016 03:59:33AM EST by Min Seob Lee

    Category Zainab Gilani Kana Shoji
    Use of evidence: 4.1 3.9
    Delivery skill: 4.1 3.7
    Coherence of arguments: 4.1 3.9
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.1 3.8
    Identification of key points: 4.1 3.8
    Comments: 1. I got your 'need' to international law. But if you could provide what kind of mechanism, and what standard for the law, you could have more pre-emptive set-up. Maybe your 'human nature' could have been used in your first speech.

    2. Your strongest reasoning to support 'preserving extraterrestrial lives' is for human races. Because this resolution also requires to discuss 'ecosystems', you could have expanded your discussion by assuming more various situations ; for example, extraterrestrial Intelligences.
    1. Just emphasizing 'It is unknown.' is not that strong response. If you could have using loophole your opponent by set-up your own negative/positive scenario can help judge to compare each possible situations.

    2. In your final speech, there are quite many articles as supporting materials. But rather than listing those evidences, pick up most relevant cases and explain why it is important in your earlier part of speeches could give you stronger moral justification.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Zainab Gilani

    Reason for Decision:

    In the issue of how we can make new law, opposition said that it is hard to make law to uncertainty of existence. Proposition respond that we can still make law by saying that we know human nature. Until this point, I thought it was statemate. But when opposition said that we don't know contamination is good or bad, and didn't respond proposition's benefit, I could get propostion's 'bad part of contamination' in her constructive case, but I couldn't get what the 'good part of contamination' in the opposition's constructive case.

    Opposition speaker listed several articles in the international law, but I didn't get how these articles can make to disregard proposition's justification for ethical obligation. Because Opposition speaker didn't substantiated what the articles implies, and what the benefits/harms if we keep the status quo is, I could only assume that opposition's human right to develop universe freely when Universe have no extraterrestrial live can be recognized as reasonable choice. When extraterrestrial lives are truly exist, proposition have superior moral justification than opposition's case because opposition's case simply disregard this situation.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT