Prospect ST (Sophia Tian)

Hi practical reasoners! I'm Sophia, and I debated for Prospect High School from 2020 to 2024. I obsessively stalked the older debater pages on here and also wrote some articles on my own (Cap K, Intro to Theory, Particularism, etc.), so I thought it'd be cool if I threw my prep here. If you've ever read any articles on phil from this library, chances are that I, Zach, or Ben wrote it, so I hope you enjoy!

I did a lot of phil debate in my career -- it was the easiest option available to me at the time. It required a lot less prep than other styles of debate, which helped me avoid burnout. It also didn't require as much coaching, so I find it a valuable option for people (mostly in Texas/the East Coast) who don't want to spend that much money on this activity.

I get some questions asking me how I did phil debate as a small school, so I thought I'd answer them here.

Phil Debate on the West Coast

Silly rabbit, trix are for kids!

1. If you are substantive enough, any judge will vote for you.
2. Caveat #1: If you are substantive enough, any judge, barring policy judges (judges that came from policy debate), will vote for you.
3. Conclusion - If you pref wisely you should be fine

There are a good amount of judges that are surprisingly solid for straight up phil. On the West Coast, I ran phil affs with util advantages, carded pretty much everything, overexplained, etc. A lot of it is in how you do your prefs, and if you want to seriously run phil, you should probably expect that your best judges are not going to exist and that every round will probably be an uphill battle for you. Your West Coast opponents will also pref the complete opposite of you, so as you get farther into a tournament, the elim panels will get more and more unforgiving as less flex judges will be obligated in for remaining rounds. Being flexible enough to go for 2-3 other argument types will benefit you greatly.

Learning Phil Debate

Phil debate, in my eyes, is just the ultimate tech-check -- not only do you have to be technically proficient, but you also need to be able to explain things in a way that's understandable. After every round, I'd probably redo my 2NR or 2AR around 5-6 times, or however many times it took me until I finally got the speech "right." I wouldn't let myself write notes down on my flow to help myself in the speech, since at that point it'd become a doc -- going off what you had in round helps you practice extempting and memorizing certain analytics (for example, AT Tailoring Objection). I'd do this immediately after every round ended.

I also read a good amount, although I avoided reading source literature. I relied on online encyclopedias like the IEP and the SEP , and Youtube channels like PhilosophyTube. I spent most of my free time when I was bored thinking of analytics and how they interacted with each other (in my defense, when one is running the mile to assess their California Fitness Standards, there is not much to think about besides calc indicts).

I'll probably write a full length article on how to "do" phil debate soon, but it's always good to know the philosophy well enough to explain to a layperson. Using examples, numbering your arguments/signposting, and seeming knowledgeable always gives you a speaks boost. For example, if your opponent says "Freedom is not uniform, meaning Kant can't account for it under his a priori binary" a good response could be "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori," but the best response would be something like "Freedom comes in many different forms but it can still be a priori e.g., saying a triangle has 3 sides is an a priori truth, but there are many different types of triangles -- scalene, isosceles, and equilateral even though they share the same property." While the second response is longer, it's also more detailed and explains the concept a lot better than the first. Longer responses are also not uniformly bad -- they give your judge time to flow, which can be a breath of fresh air in blippy phil debates.

Small School Debate

(This is the part where I do some shameless advertising)

If you want mentorship, you can join Peptalk Debate, which will pair you with an experienced mentor who will teach you in your area of interest. If you're a gender minority (non-cis male), you can also sign up for Women in Debate (W.in) and receive mentoring from a gender minority. W.in also has blogs with advice on how to navigate debate as a small school, and both organizations have lectures. For people who want to go to camp, W.in also has a scholarship program to match you to camps :)

Wiki stalking is going to be your best friend, especially if you don't do policy -- phil and K links can be easily acquired and used whenever you want as long as you're not at the first tournament of the topic.

2022 -- 2023

January/February

ACs

I mostly read Kant with an ASEAN advantage, but in more tricky rounds I'd just fill the aff with preempts (theory or AT: K) instead of the util advantage. I kept the Kant framework and advantage relatively short (< 3:00) since most people don't LBL the justifications anyway, so it wasted time in the aff that I could use to add other more strategic preempts. The one below is the longer Kant framework by itself with all the carded preempts I'd put in the framework.

JF23 -- Kant AC

JF23 -- Kant AC Frontlines

My pride and joy:

JF23 -- Kritikal Kantsequentialism AC

NCs

Read this NC mostly to get high speaks in front of judges that disliked skepticism. I'd usually run skep whenever I could though since the topic wasn't very balanced philosophy-wise.

JF23 -- Kant NC

This was the skep NC I ran a lot with its own "truth testing" justification. I found it strategic because it avoided the common criticisms against TT (too many tricks and a prioris) while also preserving the benefits (running skep).

JF23 -- Moral Antirealism NC

I was sent this disad by an alien named Morp that had a particular interest in philosophy and probability.

JF23 -- Morp DA

Theory

My other pride and joy:

JF23 -- Furry Spec

November/December

ACs

I read Kant with the Brahmaputra Dams advantage (thanks Elmer!)

ND22 -- Kant AC

ND22 -- Kant AC Frontlines

NCs

Not the most viable NC, ran it mostly for the speaks thing I mentioned above.

ND22 -- Kant NC

I read this NC to troll.

ND22 -- Particularism NC

2021 -- 2022

It's literally all Kant.