Data-Fwk

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

1/74

Texas 2010 NDTData Framework Thiele

Data Framework

1NC Framework...............................................................................................................................................................................22NC O/V Framework....................................................................................................................................................................92NC Kickin O!t...........................................................................................................................................................................10"T# $% &eneric........................................................................................................................................................................11Violation# K "''s...........................................................................................................................................................................12Violation# (")sol!te *m+act Calc,----.........................................................................................................................................1Violation# xtinction *m+acts.........................................................................................................................................................1Violation# ncertaint 3(co!l4,5....................................................................................................................................................16Violation# Certaint 3(will,5...........................................................................................................................................................19Violation ( x+ert was ri ht )e'ore,...............................................................................................................................................20Violation# (%!lti+le x+erts " ree,..............................................................................................................................................21Violation# 7an !a e 3---5.............................................................................................................................................................22Violation# 7aw 8e iews.................................................................................................................................................................2:Violation# 7ow;Violation# N!clear 1"T# 2"T# xtra;8esol!tional B!r4en......................................................................................................................................................>:"T# C/* !4 e Discretion/ Not Voter...........................................................................................................................................>"T# C/* !4 e Discretion............................................................................................................................................................>A"T# C/* !4 e Discretion............................................................................................................................................................>9"T# C/* !4 e Discretion............................................................................................................................................................ 0"T# C/* 8ole+la in .................................................................................................................................................................... 1"T# C/* *m+licit Citation............................................................................................................................................................. 2"T# C/* ?tan4+oint +istemolo ............................................................................................................................................... :"T# C/* !ali'ications................................................................................................................................................................."T# C/* Data# Ca+italism &oo4...................................................................................................................................................................Data# N!clear Deterrence &oo4..................................................................................................................................................... 6Data# N!clear Deterrence &oo4.....................................................................................................................................................A0

"FF "ns !antitati e

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

2/74


1NC Framework

". V"7 "T CO%< T*N&

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

3/74


B. VOT N & ON A5 an4 3 e''re sJ 19 A5 ex+resses the i4eaJ (There m!st )e a !ni'orm stan4ar4o' ali4it 'or all h +othesesJ irres+ecti e o' the s!)Pect . Di''erent laws ma hol4 in 4i''erent s!)PectsJ )!t the m!st )e teste4 )the same criteria R otherwise we ha e no !arantee that o!r 4ecisions will )e those warrante4 ) the 4ata an4 not merel the res!lt o' ina4eM!ate anal sis or o' )elie in what we want to )elie e ., Th!s the !nit o' science +rinci+le sets the same stan4ar4s 'orwork in the nat!ral an4 social sciences. For exam+leJ this ran e o' consi4erations is +artic!larl rele ant 'or those in economicswho cross;correlate aria)les an4 assert ca!sation on the )asis o' s!ch correlations alone 3?ee Qellner 319A9a5 'or consi4erationo' s!ch tests an4 o' alternati e 4e'initions o' ca!salit 5 or those who carelessl test all h +otheses in the (> acce+trePects n4rome., "lsoJ we m!st em+hasi e the im+ortance o' a eneral !ni'ie4 set o' metho4s 'or !se in science an4 the !n4esira)ilito' !nnecessar Par on an4 a4 hoc metho4s.

&i en that we take the !nit o' science +rinci+le serio!sl J we ma next ask what are the main o)Pecti es o' science. "s Karl

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

4/74


M!anti'ication o' this !ncertaint ) associatin +ro)a)ilities with laws an4 +ro i4in lo icall consistent +roce4!res 'orchan in these +ro)a)ilities as new e i4ence ar ises . *n this re ar4J +ro)a)ilit is iewe4 as re+resentin a 4e ree o' reasona)le

)elie' with the limitin al!es o' ero )ein com+lete 4is)elie' or 4is+roo' an4 o' one )ein com+lete )elie' o' +roo'. For e''re sJ Ba esian statistics is im+lie4 ) his theor o' scienti'ic metho4. Th!sJ Ba esian statistics is the technolo o'in4!cti e in'erence. The o+erations o' Ba esian statistics ena)le !s to make +ro)a)ilit statements a)o!t +arameters al!es an4'!t!re al!es o' aria)les . "lsoJ o+timal +oint estimates an4 +oint +re4ictions can )e rea4il o)taine4 ) Ba esian metho4s. 5 an4 3QellnerJ 19A15 an4 3QellnerJ 19A9)5 'or +resentationsJ 4isc!ssions an4 a++lications o'Ba esian metho4s.To ill!strate in4!cti e in'erence in econometricsJ consi4er %ilton Frie4manHs Theor o' the Cons!m+tion F!nction . *n his )ookFrie4man set 'orth a )ol4 in4!cti e enerali ation whichJ he showe4J ex+laine4 aria tion in m!ch +ast 4ataJ a 'act that increase4most in4i i4!als 4e ree o' reasona)le )elie' in his theor . F!rtherJ Frie4man +ro+ose4 a n!m)er o' a44itional tests o' his mo4elan4 +re4icte4 their o!tcomes J an exam+le o' what we re'erre4 to a)o e as in4!cti e in'erence . %an o' these tests ha e )een

+er'orme4 with res!lts com+ati)le with Frie4manHs +re4ictions. ?!ch res!lts enhance the 4e ree o' reasona)le )elie' that we ha ein Frie4manHs theor . This is the kin4 o' research in economics an4 econometrics J which ill!strates well the nat!re o' in4!cti ein'erence an4 is J in m o+inionJ most +ro4!cti e ."s re ar4s in4!cti e enerali ationsJ there are a 'ew +ointsJ which 4eser e to )e em+hasi e4. FirstJ a useful starting point forinductive generalization in many instances is the proposition that all variation is considered random or nonsystematicunless shown otherwise . " oo4 exam+le o' the 'r!it'!lness o' s!ch a startin +oint is i en ) the ran4om walk h +othesis 'orstock +rices in stock market research. %an researchers ha e +!t 'orwar4 mo4els to 'orecast stock +rices ) !se o' aria)les s!ch

as a!to salesJ chan es in mone J an4 the like onl to 'in4 that their 'orecasts are no )etter than those iel4e4 ) a ran4om walkmo4el. *n other areasJ when a researcher proposes a new effect, the burden is on him to show that data support the neweffect . The initial hypothesis is thus, No effect unless shown otherwise .

/ A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

5/74


V N *F T= *8

)e in to )ri4 e these 'iel4s. *n a44itionJ short M!antitati e worksho+s 3s!ch as those o''ere4 ) the *nter!ni ersitConsorti!m 'or

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

6/74


T=*? *? B C" ? D"T" D C"T*ON O T$ *&=? T= 8*?K OF T= "FF *%

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

7/74


8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

8/74


4ata mana ement is 4oc!mente4 in a n!m)er o' scienti'ic 'iel4s I:AJ:6J:9LJ ma res!lt in errors in anal in an4 re+ortin o'res!ltsJ an4 o) io!sl im+e4es the sharin o' 4ata a'ter res!lts are +!)lishe4. 8e ar4less o' the !n4erl in +rocessesJ the res!ltson the )asis o' the c!rrent +a+ers im+l that it is most 4i''ic!lt to eri' +!)lishe4 statistical res!lts when these are contentio!s.$e 'oc!se4 here on N=?T within two +s cholo Po!rnals an4 so it is4esira)le to re+licate o!r res!lts in other 'iel4s an4 in thecontext o' alternati e statistical a++roaches. =owe erJ it is likel thatsimilar +ro)lems +la a role in the wi4es+rea4 rel!ctance toshare 4ata in other scienti'ic 'iel4s I1:J1 J1>J1 J1AJ16J19J20L. Beca!se existin !i4elines on 4ata sharin o''er little +romise 'orim+ro ement I 0LJ +ro ress in +s cholo ical science an4 relate4 'iel4s wo!l4 )ene'it 'rom ha in research 4ata itsel' )e +art o'

the +rocess o' re+lication I1>J1 LJ nota)l ) the esta)lishment ) Po!rnalsJ +ro'essional or ani ationsJ an4 rantin )o4ies o'man4ator 4ata archi in +olicies. %ore strin ent +olicies concernin 4ata archi in will not onl 'acilitate eri'ication o'anal ses an4 corrections o' the scienti'ic recor4J )!t also im+ro e the M!alit o' re+ortin o' statistica l res!lts. Chan in +oliciesreM!ire )etter e4!cational trainin in4ata mana ement an4 4ata archi in J which is c!rrentl s!)o+timal in man 'iel4sI: J:AJ:6J:9L. On the other han4Jtechnical ca+a)ilities 'or stora e are alrea4 a aila)le. For instanceJ se eral trial re isters in theme4ical sciences 3like clinicaltrials. o 5 ena)le stora e o' research 4ata. 8i oro!s archi in o' 4ata in ol es 4oc!mentation o'aria)lesJ meta;4ataJ sa in 4ata 'iles in 'ormats that are ro)!st 3e. .J "?C** 'iles5J an4 s!)mittin 'iles to re+ositories thatalrea4 reM!ire these stan4ar4s. Best +ractices in con4!ctin anal ses an4 re+ortin statistical res!lts in ol eJ 'or instanceJ thatall co;a!thors hol4 co+ies o' the 4ataJ an4 that at least two o' the a!thors in4e+en4entl r!n all the anal ses 3as we 4i4 in thisst!4 5. ?!ch 4o!)le;checks an4 the +ossi)ilit 'or others to in4e+en4entl eri' res!lts later sho!l4 o a lon wa in 4ealinwith h!man 'actors in the con4!ct o' statistical anal ses an4 the re+ortin o' res!lts.

6 / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

9/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

10/74


2NC Kickin O!t

$ H8 NOT &O*N& FO8 D"T"J DONHT "77O$ N

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

11/74


"T# $% &eneric2NC

1. T= E DONHT % T O 8 *NT 8< ; 8O? K*ND 09 C8 "T ? " T=8

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

12/74


Violation# K "''s1NC

C8*T* D B"T 8? 8

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

13/74


the %atrix. The 'ilms en a in l re+resent crit ical theor s retreat 'rom notions o' tr!th an4 realit as so!rces o' a enc J an4J asllen %eiksins $oo4 an4 others ha e ar !e4J 'rom class;)ase4 theor an4 +olit ics. The secon4 maPor section o' the essa ex+lores the realist +hiloso+h o' classical %arxismJ +artic!larl the rhetoricall richconce+ts o' real class interests 3rather than i4entities5 an4 soli4arit amon those who share real interests. These conce+ts +ro i4e

)ases 'or i4enti'ication an4 conPoint action across i4entit 4i''erences J a oi4in the tra+s o' i4entit essentialism J anti;h!manismJ an4 na\ e in4i i4!alism . *nterests an4 soli4arit are the )!il4in )locks o' a %arxist rhetoric an4 o' a real+olitik o' class !tterlnecessar to challen in the o++ression an4 ex+loitation o' ca+italism to4a . This +roPect has )een 4e al!e4 an4 4ismisse4 in

theories with anti; h!manist an4 nearl excl!si el s m)olic commitments that i e awa the ro!n4 'or +oliticalinstr!mentalit . en rhetorical theor J ori inall the st!4 o' +ractical inter entionist +oliticsJ has allowe4 a enc to witherawa in the sha4ow o' str!ct!ralism an4 relati ism .

1: / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

14/74


Violation# (")sol!te *m+act Calc,----1NC

T= "FF C= 88E

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

15/74


D BN 8# That s Nassim Tale)J the a!thor o' (Foole4 B 8an4omness, an4 (The Black ?wan.,T"7 B# *t s m!ch costlier 'or !s as a raceJ to make the mistake o' not seein a leo+ar4 than ha in the ill!sion o' +attern an4ima inin a leo+ar4 where there is none. "n4 that errorJ in other wor4sJ mistakin the non;ran4om 'or the ran4omJ which is what* call the (one;wa )ias., Now that )ias works extremel wellJ )eca!se what s the )i 4eal o' ettin o!t o' tro!)leW *t s notcostin o! an thin . B!t in the mo4ern worl4J it is not M!ite harmless . *ll!sions o' certaint makes o! think that thin s thatha en t exhi)ite4 riskJ 'or exam+le the stock marketJ are riskless . $e ha e the t!rke +ro)lem the )!tcher 'ee4s the t!rke 'ora certain n!m)er o' 4a sJ an4 then the t!rke ima ines this is +ermanent.

C"8D CONT*N N ?D BN 8# =ow 4oes that sel';criticism come into +la an4 act!all chan e the co!rse o' the +re4ictionWT T7OCK# $ellJ one sign that you " re capable of constructive self#criticism is that you " re not dumbfounded by thequestion$ %hat would it take to convince you you " re wrong& 'f you can " t answer that question you can take that as awarning sign.

1> / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

16/74


Violation# xtinction *m+acts1NC

GT8 %

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

17/74


D BN 8# ?o whether it s 'oot)all ex+erts callin ?!n4a s ame or economists 'orecastin the econom J or +olitical +!n4itslookin 'or the next re ol!tionJ we re talkin a)o!t acc!rac rates that )arel )eat a coin toss . B!t ma )e all these ! s 4eser e a

)reak. %a )e it s P!st inherentl har4 to +re4ict the '!t!re o' other h!man )ein s. The re so mallea)leR so !n+re4icta)leX ?ohow a)o!t a +re4iction where h!man )ein s are inci4ental to the main actionW

1A / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

18/74


Violation# ncertaint 3(co!l4,51NC

T= D*? NT B T$ N T= *8 T"&? "ND C"8D?

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

19/74


Violation# Certaint 3(will,51NC

T= "FFH? 00 ears a o. "n4 the

ro! h translation was the 'ox knows man thin s )!t the he4 eho knows one )i thin .D BN 8# ?oJ talk to me a)o!t what the 'oxes 4o as +re4ictors an4 what the he4 eho s 4o as +re4ictors.T T7OCK# ?!re. The 'oxes ten4 to ha e a rather eclecticJ o++ort!nist ic a++roach to 'orecastin . The re er +ra matic . "'amo!s a+horism ) Den Giao+in was he (4i4n t care i' the cat was white or )lack as lon as it ca! ht mice. , "n4 * think theattit!4e o' man 'oxes is the reall 4i4n t care whether i4eas came 'rom the le't or the ri htJ the ten4e4 to 4e+lo them rather'lexi)l in 4eri in +re4ictions. ?o the o'ten )orrowe4 i4eas across schools o' tho! ht that he4 eho s iewe4 as moresacrosanct. There are man s!)s+ecies o' he4 eho . B!t what the ha e in common is a ten4enc to a++roach 'orecastin as a4e4!cti eJ to+;4own exercise. The start o'' with some a)stract +rinci+lesJ an4 the a++l those a)stract +rinci+les to mess J real;worl4 sit!ationsJ an4 the 'it is o'ten 4eci4e4l im+er'ect.D BN 8# ?o 'oxes ten4 to )e less 4o matic than he4 eho sJ which makes them )etter +re4ictors. B!tJ i' o! ha4 to !essJ who4o o! think more likel to show !+ TV or in an o+;e4 col!mn J the +ra maticJ n!ance4 'ox or the know;it;all he4 eho WI?O ND %ONT"& LD BN 8# Eo! ot itXT T7OCK# =e4 eho sJ * thinkJ are more likel to o''er M!ota)le so!n4 )ites J whereas 'oxes are more likel to o''er rathercom+lexJ ca eat;la4en so!n4 )ites. The re not so!n4 )ites an more i' the re com+lex an4 ca eat;la4en.

19 / A
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/06/30/the-folly-of-prediction-full-transcript/http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/06/30/the-folly-of-prediction-full-transcript/

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

20/74


Violation ( x+ert was ri ht )e'ore,2NC

?"E*N& T= G< 8T $"? 8*&=T ONC B FO8 *? T= 7*NK ; *T? NO D*FF 8 NT F8O% T= &"%B7 8$=O T=*NK? T= E $*77 $*N T= N GT ="ND ?T B C" ? T= E $ON " ="ND > E "8? "&O. C= 88E

earsJ an4 she wo!l4 talk a lot a)o!t the times she was ri ht. *

wo!l4 ha e to remin4 her a)o!t the 1: times that she was wron . "n4 witho!t an sort o' market mechanism or incenti e 'orkee+in the +re4iction makers honestJ there s lots o' incenti e to o o!t an4 to make these wil4 +re4ictions. "n4 those are theones that are remem)ere4 an4 talke4 a)o!t. Think o' a)o!t one o' the +re4ictions that o! hear echoe4 more o'ten than P!st a)o!tan one is oe Namath s 'amo!s +rono!ncement a)o!t how the ets were oin to win the ?!+er Bowl. "n4 it was !nex+ecte4."n4 it ha++ene4. "n4 i' the ets ha4 lost the ?!+er BowlJ no)o4 wo!l4 remem)er that oe Namath ma4e that +rono!ncement.D BN 8# "n4 con ersel J o! can +ro)a)l 'in4 at least one +la er on e er team that s lost the ?!+er Bowl in the last 'ortears that 4i4 +re4ict that his team wo!l4 win.

20 / A
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/06/30/the-folly-of-prediction-full-transcript/http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/06/30/the-folly-of-prediction-full-transcript/

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

21/74


Violation# (%!lti+le x+erts " ree ,2NC

8 CT < 8

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

22/74


Violation# 7an !a e 3---5

" T=O8? ? T 8%? 7*K (;19 withs!)seM!ent missile4e elo+ments.*n con ressional testimon on N* 9>;19J 8ichar4Coo+erJ Chairman o' the National*ntelli enceCo!ncilJ state4# (we are likel to 4etect an in4i eno!s+ro ram to 4e elo+ a lon ;ran e )allistic missileman ears

)e'ore 4e+lo ment, e en allowin 'or theacM!isition o' some 'orei n technolo ) co!ntrieso' interest.21EetJ recentintelli ence leaks an4 otherre+ortin s! ests that *ranJ with 'orei n assistanceJ isnow within two ears o' a 1J>00 km )allisticmissiles stem. The most recent an4 larin 4emonstrationo' the 'ail!re to o)ser e this a4monition can )e 'o!n4in the De'enseDe+artment s recent re+ort

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

23/74


Violation# 7aw 8e iews2NC

7"$ 8 V* $? "8 D

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

24/74


$e th!s )e an ) castin the net er wi4el J rea4in all 2:1 articles +!)lishe4 in all "merican law re iews )etween 19 90 an420 0 0 I-1 L that ha4 the wor4 em+irical in their title . :A $e in entorie4 these articles )eca!seJ ) irt!e o' their tit lesJ the atleast claime4 to )e con4!ctin research )ase4 on real;worl4 o)ser ations. m+irical research a++arentl has )ecome a term o'art in le al scholarshi+J an4 man o' those !sin it in their titles a++ear to )e intentionall i4enti' in their work with thismo ement. $e ha e since )een s!++lementin this search strate with a narrower one inten4e4 to !nco er an4 e al!ate some o'the )est in em+irical le al research. This searchJ still in +ro ressJ incl!4es all em+irical articles 'rom six to+ law re iews3Chica oJ Col!m)iaJ =ar ar4J NE J ?tan'or4J an4 Eale5 +!)lishe4 )etween 199> an4 2000. :6 *t also incl!4es the 'i't most ;

cite4 articles 3accor4in to the 7e al ?cholarshi+ Network5 that were written ) le al aca4emics an4 a++eare4 in the law re iews.:9 $e a44e4 to these 'ormal lists ia a m!ch more in'ormal a++roachR namel J ) rea4in wi4el thro! h law re iewsJ 'ollowincitationsJ an4 rea4in '!rther. $hen le al aca4emics learne4 we were workin on this +roPectJ man were kin4 eno! h to sen4 !stheir em+irical work or to re'er !s to othersJ an4 we rea4 these as well. Finall J we examine4 st!4ies in 'o!r +eer;re iewe4 law

Po!rnals 3the o!rnal o' 7aw U conomicsR the o!rnal o' 7awJ conomicsJ U Or ani ationR the o!rnal o' 7e al ?t!4iesJ an4 the7aw U ?ociet 8e iew5 e en tho! h social scientists an4 )!siness school 'ac!lt a!thore4 most o' the articles in them;;notmem)ers o' the le al comm!nit J who constit!te the +rimar a!4ience 'or this "rticle. 0$e ha e o) io!sl not e al!ate4 an thin close to all em+irical research in the lawJ )!t we ha e searche4 extensi el insomethin er ro! hl a++roximatin a re+resentati e sam+le o' all em+irical research in the law re iews. $e also 'oc!se44ee+l in se eral wa s in areas where M!alit sho!l4 )e hi h J so m!ch so thatJ 'or this sam+leJ an concl!sions we 4raw sho!l4

)e )iase4 a ainst a 'in4in o' metho4olo ical +ro)lems . I-1AL NonethelessJ o!r res!lts are 4isco!ra in . $hile it is certainl tr!e that some articles in the law re iews are )etter than othersJ an4 some meet the r!les o' in'erence )etter than others 4oJ e er one we ha e rea4 th!s 'ar;;e er sin le one;; iolates at leastone o' the r!les we 4isc!ss in the )alance o' this "rticle. 1 ?ince all ;;e er sin le one;; ha e the +otential to 'in4 their wa into aco!rt case J an a4ministrati e +rocee4in J or a le islati e hearin J we can onl ima ine the serio!s conseM!ences 'or +!)lic +olic

3not to mention 'or the 4e elo+ment o' knowle4 e5 that ma ha e alrea4 res!lt e4;;or still ma res!lt. 2

2 / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

25/74


Violation# 7ow; millionJ re4!cin the +ro)a)ilit o' loss ) a 'actor o' 100 to eM!al 1/1J000 J lea in the ex+ecte4 loss!nchan e4 at Z1J>00. The thir4 ariant increase4 the si e o' the loss to Z1.> )illionJ which incl!4e4 the al!e o' +ersonal inP!rlossesJ an4 accom+anie4 it with a +ro)a)ilit o' the loss o' 1/1J000J000. Th!sJ this chan e scale4 losses !+ ) a 'actor o' 1J000an4 scale4 the +ro)a)ilit 4own ) a 'ac]tor o' 1J000J lea in the ex+ecte4 loss !nchan e4. For the +ersonal inP!r M!estionJ theli es lost were al!e4 at Z> million +er li'eJ an4 res+on4ents were tol4 that this amo!nt wo!l4 re'lect the '!ll social al!e o' theloss. *n e er instanceJ the s!r e in4icate4 that the com+an ha4 s!''icient reso!rces to +a the 4ama es.9"n exam+le o' one o' these M!estions 3the interme4iate case5 is the 'ollowin #Eo! are C O o' 8ock %o!ntain "irline. The car o 4oor on the +lane 4oes not o+erate +ro+erl . Fixin it costs Z2J000. *' it isnot 'ixe4J there is a)sol!tel no sa'et risk. Ver relia)le en ineerin estimates in4icate that there is onl a 1/1J000 chance o erthe ex+ecte4 li'e o' the +lane that there will )e a total loss to o!r com+an o' Z1.> million 4!e to +ro+ert 4ama e ca!se4 ) this

+ro)lem. Th!sJ there is a 999/1J000 chance that there will )e no 4ama e whatsoe er. Eo!r com]+an has no ins!rance )!t 4oesha e s!''icient reso!rces to +a these 4ama es.1^8es+on4ents were then aske4 to circle whether the 'irm sho!l4 !n4er]take the re+air an4 secon4J i' the re+air is not !n4ertakenan4 there was Z1.> million in +ro+ert 4ama esJ to in4icate whether +!niti e 4ama es sho!l4 )e awar4e4.=ow one iews the scenario 4e+en4s in +art on the test )ein a++lie4. The chie' exec!ti e o''icer 3C O5 o' the com+an sho!l4

+res!ma)l )e concerne4 with +ro'it maximi ation. The sa'et meas!res 4escri)e4 in ol e4 'inancial e''ects that wo!l4 a ll )einternali e4 ) the 'irm. ?ince sa'et im+ro ements 'ail a )ene'it;cost testJ the wo!l4 not enhance 'irm +ro'ita)ilit . !4 esres+on4in as C Os mi htJ howe erJ im+!te a loss in the al!e o' the com+an Hs re+!tation in the e ent o' an acci4ent in ol in

+ersonal inP!r J makin them more likel to a4 ocate sa'et im+ro ements in this instance."++lication o' le al r!les sho!l4 not )e a''ecte4 ) )roa4l )ase4 re+!tational e''ects. *' a sa'et meas!re 4oes not +ass a

)ene'it;cost testJ the com+an sho!l4 not )e 'o!n4 ne li ent 'or 'ailin to a4o+t it .

)e a wi4e s+rea4 )etween )ene'its an4 costsJ a re+eate4 'ail!re ) the com+an to a4o+t sa'e +racticesJ or other consi4erationsthat make the com+an tr!l reckless an4 not sim+l ne li ent. *n none o' the three scenarios is there an )asis 'or awar4in

+!niti e 4ama es. *n4ee4J ) constr!ction the com+an will ne er )e ne li ent 'or 'ailin to a4o+t the sa'et im+ro ement.Ta)le > s!mmari es the res+onses to the two M!estions 'or each o' the risk scenarios. *n the case o' the low +ro+ert 4ama eamo!ntJ 6 o' the P!4 es wo!l4 not !n4ertake the re+airJ which is consistent with economic e''icienc +rinci+les. "lmost athir4 o' the sam+le wo!l4 !n4ertake the re+air e en tho! h the cost o' the re+air was )elow the ex+ecte4 )ene'its.

2> / A

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

26/74


The attit!4e towar4 +!niti e 4ama es in this low loss case shown in

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

27/74


'in4in is that +ersonal +re'erences an4 +erce+tional )iases 4o not reatl a''ect ne li ence P!4 ments. =owe erJ the sie o' thestakes i4eall sho!l4 not matterJ since the ex+ecte4 losses 3i.e.J +ro)a)ilit x 4ama e5 is the same in e er instance ."ltho! h +ersonal risk +erce+tion )iases an4 risk al!ations 4o not a++ear to )e instr!mentalJ the res!lts are not entirel'a ora)le with res+ect to the so!n4ness o' P!4icial 4ecisions. *n terms o' the o erall res+onses to the scenariosJ P!4 es weree enl 4i i4e4 )etween re+airin an4 not re+airin the +laneJ e en tho! h strict a++lication o' economic ne li ence r!les wo!l4in4icate that not re+airin the +lane was 4esira)le. %oreo erJ e en tho! h the 'irm was not ne li ent in these exam+lesJ man

P!4 es )elie e that +!niti e 4ama es were a++lica)leJ +artic!larl when nonmonetar losses are hi h. "war4in +!niti e

4ama es when a 'irm meets a ne li ence stan4ar4 is certainl ina++ro+riateJ as it in4icates a 'ail!re to re'lect on the !n4erl in )ene'it;cost tra4eo''sJ +artic!larl when there are lar e nonmonetar stakes.This res!lt is a so)erin messa e 'or com+anies 'ace4 with risk;cost calc!lations . *' these com+anies 'ollow the !r in s o'

P!4icial scholars s!ch as !4 e Frank aster)rook an4 attem+t to think s stematicall a )o!t the risks an4 costs o' their actionJthen e en i' the make the correct economic 4ecision it is +ossi)le that the will risk +!niti e 4ama esJ +ar]tic!larl whennonmonetar conseM!ences are in ol e4.11 *n the &eneral %otors 3&%5 tr!ck si4e im+act caseJ &% ha4 calc!late4 the cost o'the sa'et im+ro ement an4 concl!4e4 that these costs were not o!twei he4 ) the ex+ecte4 sa'et )ene'its.12 This anal sis

+arallele4 the a++roach taken 'or the For4

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

28/74

Violation# N!clear

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

29/74

Violation# N!clear

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

30/74

Violation# *nternational 8elations1NC

?T8ON& D"T" *? N C ??"8E FO8 ? CC ??F 7 *NT 8N"T*ON"7 8 7"T*ON? 5.C"8D CONT*N ?To re iew the on oin 4isc!ssion o' theor in international relations in all its m ria4 'orms wo!l4 )e an enc clo+e4ic task initsel'. 16 *n its ario!s 'ormsJ it has encom+asse4 the M!estions o' what theor mi ht )eJ what international relations an4 *8theor mi ht )eJ how one oes a)o!t ett in itJ what are the )est wa s 3an4 also the least +ro4!cti e wa s5 o' ettin itJ whatthe state o' international relations theor mi ht )e at an i en timeJ an4 e en whether or not it is necessar to 4e elo+ theor inor4er to 4o whate er it is that scholars st!4 in international relations sho!l4 )e 4oin . "s %cClellan4 319A2# 205 notes# +Thetheory of international relations remains an indefinite topic with its tricky aspects.+* wo!l4 likeJ +erha+s ar)itraril J to 4irect m comments to the M!estion o' what +lace M!antitati e metho4olo has ha4 in the

+rocess o' 4e elo+in theor in *8. *n all 'airnessJ * sho!l4 +ro i4e some in4ication o' what * take theor to )e. "'ter %eehan319 ># 126 :05J * see theor to mean an ex+lanator 4e ice which s stematicall )rin s to ether an4 relates isolate4 o)ser a)le

+henomena. * take a theor to )e a enerali ation or set o' enerali ations. &eneral statements classi' o)ser a)les accor4in totheir +ro+ertiesJ an4 a classi'ication s stem is the sim+lest 'orm o' sin le ste+ ex+lanation.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

31/74

Violation# N!clear "cci4ents2NC

N C7 "8 "CC*D NT? 7*T 8"T 8 *? NOT V 8E "NT*F*"B7

?echser 09INO# To44 ?. ?echserJ ni ersit o' Vir inia (?ho!l4 the nite4 ?tates or the *nternational Comm!nit " ressi el

N!clear Non+roli'eration

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

32/74

2NC 4!cation2NC %o4!le

$ CONT8O7 T= B ?T *NT 8N"7 TO D C"T*ON

"5

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

33/74

"T# Tetlock

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

34/74

"T# Tetlock

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

35/74

"T# Fairness2NC

1. T=*? *?NHT NF"*8 *T? NO D*FF 8 NT T="N " C8*T* *%

+er'orm an4 make a aila)le estimates o' their retail stran4e4 costs. &i en that the '!nction o' re !lation is to +ro i4e a 'airo!tcomeJ an4 that +olic recommen4ations ) the $orkin &ro!+ nee4 to )e )ase4 on a clear !n4erstan4in o' the +ossi)leim+acts o' certain +olic choicesJ this reM!est was eminentl reasona)le. =owe erJ the ?ta'' 4i4 not s!++ort this reM!est an4

+ro i4e4 'i e reasons to s!++ort its 4ecision.15 The o erri4in o)Pecti e o' this $orkin &ro!+ is to 4e elo+ recommen4ations'or 8!les co erin the +roce4!res to )e !se4 in connection with the M!anti'ica tion an4 reco er o' stran4e4 costsJ not an act!a lM!anti'ication o' stran4e4 costs. "s note4 a)o eJ the +!r+ose o' re !lation is to +ro i4e a 'air o!tcome. *t is not reasona)le toex+ect that metho4s 4etermine4 in isolation 'rom an !n4erstan4in o' relati e im+acts will +ro4!ce a reasona)le an4 'airo!tcome. 'n fact, not addressing quantification of outcome for policy#making eopardizes the opportunity to producepolicies that will result in a fair outcome. *n4ee4J i' !tilities ha e 4i''erin ass!m+tionsJ or coinci4ent ass!m+tions within their

+reliminar estimatesJ it wo!l4 hel+ to clari' an4 a4 ance 4isc!ssion. *t is reasona)le to ex+ect that the M!anti'ica tions 4isc!sse4in the $orkin &ro!+ wo!l4 not )e 'inal n!m)ers. *t is also reasona)le to ex+ect that 4e elo+ment o' 'inal n!m)ers will onlcome thro! h s+eci'ic 4isc!ssion o' +reliminar estimates an4 s+eci'ic +olicies that ma )e 4etermine4 )ase4 in +art on thoseestimates. ?ett in +olic on calc!lation metho4olo an4 +re'erre4 ass!m+tions +rior to s!)mission o' the 'ormal estimates 4!e

) an!ar 1J 1999 serio!sl Peo+ar4i es so!n4 +olic makin an4 the res!l tin im+act on the e''ecti eness or ia)ilit o' acom+etiti e retail market.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

36/74

>. D C"T*ON O T$ *&=? D*?8 &"8D L IctL

?ome elements in the notion ori inate in "ristotleHs tho! htR others ha e arisen in the last 'ew 4eca4es. =owe erJ ol4er !sa esremain +ower'!l 3i)i4.# 25J an4 are calle4 !+ to4a whene er +eo+le are str! lin to 4etermine who sho!l4 et to 4eci4e whatco!nts as a ali4 exercise o' reason. "s 8o)ert

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

37/74

an4 research 4esi n ha e alrea4 )een selecte4. *t is onl a'ter a research +roPect is alrea4 c&ns%i%u%ed that metho4s o' researchJ in this con entional narrow sense o' the termJ start !+. =owe erJ as critic a'ter critic has +ointe4 o!tJ it is in the context o' 4isco er that c!lt!re;wi4e ass!m+tions sha+e the erstatement an4 4esi n o' the research +roPectJ an4 there'ore select the metho4s. %oreo erJ it is well known that the a aila)ilit o'a research technolo that was itsel' selecte4 in earlier contexts o' 4isco er an4 'o!n4 +ro4!cti e 'reM!entl hel+s select whichscienti'ic +ro)lems will )e interestin to scientists an4 to '!n4ers 3c'.J e. .J ?trassmann 199:a5. "n4 c!lt!ral interestsJ al!es an4

rele ances alwa s select which +ro)lems will et to co!nt as im+ortant ones 'or research. O' co!rse in the man le o' +ractice3"n4rew

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

38/74

"T# To+ic ?+eci'ic 4!2NC

1. TO

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

39/74

"T# "'' ?+eci'ic 4!2NC

1. T= 8 ? " TO

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

40/74

"T# No Case %eets2NC

T= E ?"E NO C"? % T?1. EO 8 T=8 ?=O7D ON =O$ % C= 7*T $ ="V TO

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

41/74

"T# ?ome Thin s =a e No Data2NC

1. NO 7*NK O 8 F8"% $O8K ON7E ? ? ?T8ON& D"T" TO V"7 "T CO%< T*N&

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

42/74

"T# Framework Doesnt =a e Data2NC

1. NO 7*NK F8"% $O8K *?NHT "

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

43/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

44/74

:. 7"CK OF ?T8ON& D"T" N? 8 ? CO;O

social o)ser ers thro! ho!t the mo4ern a e. The stor oes some;thin like this. "nta onism towar4 a +artic!lar (race, main ol e s!++ose4l o)Pecti e claims a)o!t the nat!re o' +eo+le o' that race;a)o!t their moral 4e'iciencies or intel lect!alin'eriorit J 'or exam+le. These claims can )e s!)Pecte4 to scienti'ic scr!tin an4 re'!te4 . Con'ronte4 with these scienti 'icar !mentsJ rational +eo+le mi ht then alter the )elie's on which their racial enmit rests. *n this wa so!n4 science J a al!e;ne!tral enter+riseJ can +ro4!ce the ethicall 4esira)le res!lt o' !n4erminin racia l anta onism by replacing pre udice andstereotypes with data and rigorous analysis. This stor is +la!si)leJ with am+le historical +rece4ent . *t is onl ma4e more com;

+ellin when one recalls how totalitarian +olitical re imes;+artic!larl the Na is ;ha e !se4 ( )a4 science , to P!sti' their racist +olitical +ro rams . *' science 'alls !n4e r the in'l!ence o' a +olitical a en4a an4 ceases to )e an a!tonomo!s intellec;t!al acti it ;i' it )ecomes )a4 scienc e;then it can a)et the s+rea4 o' racial hatre4 . Th!s +ro+er scienti'ic ar !ment can 'oster racial toleranceJ while the a)!se o' sci;ence can lea4 to 4ist!r)in res!lts. Eet these o!tcomes are ) no means !arantee4. %hether science isgood or bad depends on its conformity with disciplines and methods that practitioners see as meeting their standards ofevidence and argument. This essentially technical matter has relatively litt le moral content. *n an e entJ scienti'icar !ment is a s+eciali e44isco!rse within a narrow comm!nit o' in esti ators o erne4 ) strict norms an44isci+lines. *n4ee4Jit is an in4ication that a 'iel4 has mat!re4 as a science when its4isco!rse takes on the M!alit o' what mi ht )e calle4

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

45/74

sociolin !istic clos!re.Thomas K!hn 319 25 stresse4 P!st this +oint in his in'l!ential workJ The ?tr!ct!reo' ?cienti'ic8e ol!tions.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

46/74

"T# Data @ Coo+te4/Calc7x T/GT

F"CT? C"N OV 8CO% *D O7O&EFisher 99I=arwoo4 Fisher Cit Colle e o' the Cit ni ersit o' New Eork Context an4 Cate or # The

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

47/74

"T# Data @ Calc 3Dillon5GT

C8*T* ? OF C"T &O8*Q*N& *&NO8 T="T *T *? *N V*T"B7 "ND

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

48/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

49/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

50/74

"T# Data @ Tr!th No 7ink Facts Not Tr!th2NC

$

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

51/74

"T# Data @ Tr!thGT

TO D NE T8 T= B CO% ? " ? 7F;F 7F*77*N&

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

52/74

"T#

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

53/74

"T# xtra;8esol!tional B!r4en2NC

1. D"T" *? *N V*T"B7 T= E ? D"T" TOO TO ?T"B7*?= T= *8 T8 T=? $*T=( "7*F*C"T*ON?HJ (D"T ,J < 8;8 V* $J "ND =*?TO8*C C"? ?T D* ? T= ?

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

54/74

"T# C/* !4 e Discretion/ Not Voter 2NC

7 TT*N& D& ? $ *&= C"8D BE C"8D *? " (8 "?ON"B*7*TE, C7"*% 8 CT *T.1. O 8 V*O7"T*ON D B"T

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

55/74

internali e4 ) the 'irm. ?ince sa'et im+ro ements 'ail a )ene'it;cost testJ the wo!l4 not enhance 'irm +ro'ita)ilit . !4 esres+on4in as C Os mi htJ howe erJ im+!te a loss in the al!e o' the com+an Hs re+!tation in the e ent o' an acci4ent in ol in

+ersonal inP!r J makin them more likel to a4 ocate sa'et im+ro ements in this instance."++lication o' le al r!les sho!l4 not )e a''ecte4 ) )roa4l )ase4 re+!tational e''ects. *' a sa'et meas!re 4oes not +ass a

)ene'it;cost testJ the com+an sho!l4 not )e 'o!n4 ne li ent 'or 'ailin to a4o+t it .

)e a wi4e s+rea4 )etween )ene'its an4 costsJ a re+eate4 'ail!re ) the com+an to a4o+t sa'e +racticesJ or other consi4erationsthat make the com+an tr!l reckless an4 not sim+l ne li ent. *n none o' the three scenarios is there an )asis 'or awar4in +!niti e 4ama es. *n4ee4J ) constr!ction the com+an will ne er )e ne li ent 'or 'ailin to a4o+t the sa'et im+ro ement.Ta)le > s!mmari es the res+onses to the two M!estions 'or each o' the risk scenarios. *n the case o' the low +ro+ert 4ama eamo!ntJ 6 o' the P!4 es wo!l4 not !n4ertake the re+airJ which is consistent with economic e''icienc +rinci+les. "lmost athir4 o' the sam+le wo!l4 !n4ertake the re+air e en tho! h the cost o' the re+air was )elow the ex+ecte4 )ene'its.

The attit!4e towar4 +!niti e 4ama es in this low loss case shown in

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

56/74

all res+on4ents in the +ersonal inP!r ariant 'a ore4 re+airin the car o 4oor. The im+licit al!e o' li'e meas!res an4 the risk +erce+tion meas!res are not statisticall si ni'icantJ exce+t 'or one instance. 8es+on4ents who ha4 hi her al!es o' the +erce+tion eM!ations slo+e coe''icient ?i were less likel to !n4ertake the car o 4oor re+air. *ncrease4 al!es o' 1:J in4icate thatthe res+on4entsH assesse4 +ro)a)ilities were closer to the >^ line an4 th!s ten4e4 to re'lect the act!al risk le el more acc!ratel .Th!sJ acc!rate risk )elie's an4 lower )iases in risk +erce+tions are associate4 with P!4 es )ein more willin to act accor4in toe''icienc norms with res+ect to the car o re+air 4ecision. " +riori the role o' this aria)le is not clearJ since hi her al!es o' ? i

co!l4 in4icate more alarmist res+onses to risk in that +ercei e4 risks res+on4 more M!ickl to chan es in act!al risks. ?ince all ? ial!es were )elow 1.0J howe erJ in this case the aria)le seems to )etter re'lect the acc!rac o' risk P!4 ments.This aria)le is notJ howe erJ 4irectl in'l!ential in the +!niti e 4ama es 4ecisionJ as the onl statisticall si ni'icant aria)leshere are the le el o' ex+ecte4 4ama es an4 whether the P!4 e )elie es that re+airin the car o 4oor was worthwhile. Th!sJ to theextent that the risk +erce+tion slo+e aria)le mattersJ it is in4irectl in that it increases the +ro)a)ilit that the res+on4ent willwant to re+air the car o 4oorJ which in t!rn increases the +ro)a)ilit that the res+on4ent )elie es that +!niti e 4ama es sho!l4a++l . O erallJ howe erJ it seems that +erce+tional )iases an4 the res+on4entHs own im+licit al!es o' li'e 4o not +la a centralrole in how the wo!l4 a44ress the ne li ence iss!e or the +!niti e 4ama es iss!e in this instance. "ttit!4es towar4 the!n4erl in re+air 4ecision an4 the si e o' the acci4ent loss are the +rimar 'actors o' conseM!ence . "n attracti e as+ect o' this'in4in is that +ersonal +re'erences an4 +erce+tional )iases 4o not reatl a''ect ne li ence P!4 ments. =owe erJ the sie o' thestakes i4eall sho!l4 not matterJ since the ex+ecte4 losses 3i.e.J +ro)a)ilit x 4ama e5 is the same in e er instance ."ltho! h +ersonal risk +erce+tion )iases an4 risk al!ations 4o not a++ear to )e instr!mentalJ the res!lts are not entirel'a ora)le with res+ect to the so!n4ness o' P!4icial 4ecisions. *n terms o' the o erall res+onses to the scenariosJ P!4 es weree enl 4i i4e4 )etween re+airin an4 not re+airin the +laneJ e en tho! h strict a++lication o' economic ne li ence r!les wo!l4in4icate that not re+airin the +lane was 4esira)le. %oreo erJ e en tho! h the 'irm was not ne li ent in these exam+lesJ man

P!4 es )elie e that +!niti e 4ama es were a++lica)leJ +artic!larl when nonmonetar losses are hi h. "war4in +!niti e4ama es when a 'irm meets a ne li ence stan4ar4 is certainl ina++ro+riateJ as it in4icates a 'ail!re to re'lect on the !n4erl in

)ene'it;cost tra4eo''sJ +artic!larl when there are lar e nonmonetar stakes.This res!lt is a so)erin messa e 'or com+anies 'ace4 with risk;cost calc!lations . *' these com+anies 'ollow the !r in s o'

P!4icial scholars s!ch as !4 e Frank aster)rook an4 attem+t to think s stematicall a )o!t the risks an4 costs o' their actionJthen e en i' the make the correct economic 4ecision it is +ossi)le that the will risk +!niti e 4ama esJ +ar]tic!larl whennonmonetar conseM!ences are in ol e4.11 *n the &eneral %otors 3&%5 tr!ck si4e im+act caseJ &% ha4 calc!late4 the cost o'the sa'et im+ro ement an4 concl!4e4 that these costs were not o!twei he4 ) the ex+ecte4 sa'et )ene'its.12 This anal sis

+arallele4 the a++roach taken 'or the For4

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

57/74

"T# C/* !4 e Discretion"7T

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

58/74

="N?ON# "n4 soJ there was a s!44en )!rst o' me4ia co era e an4 ) the er next mornin the hea4 o' the militar )asicall4eclare4 )e'ore the ?enate that this +roPect was 4ea4J an4 there was nothin more to worr a)o!t.D BN 8# $hat 4o o! think o! we collecti el J o!J in +artic!lar wo!l4 know now a)o!t that +art o' the worl4J let ssa J i' this market ha4 )een allowe4 to take rootW="N?ON# $ellJ * think we wo!l4 ha e otten m!ch earlier warnin a)o!t the re ol!tions we P!st ha4. "n4 i' we wo!l4 ha eha4 +artici+ants 'rom the %i44le ast 'orecastin those markets. Not onl we wo!l4 et a4 ance4 warnin a)o!t which thin s

mi ht ha++enJ )!t then how o!r actions co!l4 a''ect those. ?oJ 'or exam+leJ the nite4 ?tates P!st came in on the si4e o' the7i) an re)elsJ to s!++ort the 7i) a re)els a ainst the a44a'i re ime. $hat s the chances that will act!all hel+ the sit!ationJ aso++ose4 to make it worseWD BN 8# B!t i e me an exam+le o' what o! consi4er amon the har4est +ro)lems that a +re4iction market co!l4 +otentiallhel+ sol eW="N?ON# $ho sho!l4 not onl who sho!l4 we elect 'or +resi4ent )!t whether we sho!l4 o to war here or whether wesho!l4 )e in this initiati eW Or sho!l4 we a++ro e this re'orm )ill 'or me4icineJ etc. D BN 8# ?o that so!n4s er lo icalJ er a++ealin . =ow realistic is itW="N?ON# $ellJ it 4e+en4s on there )ein a set o' c!stomers who want this +ro4!ct. ?oJ o! knowJ i' +re4iction markets ha e an"chilles heelJ it s certainl the +ossi)ilit that +eo+le 4on t reall want acc!rate 'orecasts.D BN 8#

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

59/74

"T# C/* !4 e Discretion?!+ersense T/GT

D& *NT 8V NT*ON *N *N V*T"B7 *T *? *%65. Th!sJ seekin +ower is at )est 4oome4 to en4 in contra4iction an4 tensionJ an4 the limits o' +owerha e man 4imensions. *t is !n'ort!nateJ )!t as 8icoe!r +oints o!tJ it is the reat historical 4e)acles that )rin s!ch limits to o!r attention. From the aw'!l anta e +oint o' his timeJ Orwell in19 9 co!l4 )e +ro+hetic an4 warn a)o!t the relation )etween an o er4e+en4ence on l an !a e an4 its +ower to em+t t he meanin o!t o' cate ories. =is 4elineation o' the lin !istic excesses an4totalitarian +ower a''or4e4 ) d&u5le%-inkartisticall s!ms !+ how +olitical control an4 its im+lementation thro! h rhetoricJ e4!cationJ an4/or +ro+a an4a )roker cate ories ) which +eo+lerelate to an4 s+eak a)o!t social e ents. Th!sJ cate ories can )ecome the Point +ro+ert o' oices witho!t +ersonal i4entit .%oreo erJ "ren4t 319>6/19 A5 +oints o!tJ +ower is totali e4J +artic!larl when a s!s+ension o' lo ic an4 tra4itional o++osition o' cate ories like criminal an4 innocent an4 oo4 an4 e il4ri e terms an4 cate ories into meanin lessness. "t s!ch a +ointJ +ower is em)e44e4 in +olitical +ractices# mane! ersJ r!lesJ sho!ti n matchesJ c&u!s an4 +se!4o;science 3%osseJ 19 65. *nOrwellHs anti;!to+ian stateJ cate ories are em+tie4 o!t an4 sim+l !se4 instr!mentall # Big Br&%-er +!ts !+ an illo ical si n $ar is 6R +. 19AR kmanJ 19A:R %almoJ 19A>R 5. Contem+orar !ni erses o' 4isco!rse 4o n&% hol4 in check whate er im+els an in4i i4!al;sa J e''re Da!mer;or a an ;sa J one in 8wan4a;to act o!t a ainst others inwa s so +rime alJ that 4e+en4enc on _social analo H to 4escri)e or ex+lain h!man e ents seems lin !istic s!+ersense.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

60/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

61/74

"T# C/* 8ole+la in2NC

1. < 8% DO BOT= 8O7

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

62/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

63/74

"T# C/* ?tan4+oint +istemolo2NC

?T8ON& D"T" *? N C ??"8E FO8 ?T"ND "rticle >L IctL

Towar4 a New Vision o' 4!cational 8esearch*n critiM!in +ositi ismJ =orkheimer o''ere4 4ialectical social theor as an alternati e to the o er;reliance on the scienti'icmetho4 3KellnerJ 19695. Dialectical social theor is 'o!n4e4 on em+irical e i4ence )!t is !n4erwritten ) al!es an4 a normati e

+olitical stan4+oint to attack inP!sticeJ s!''erin J an4 alienation . *t assails the notion o' ( al!e 'ree, research an4 calls 'or thecentralit o' critiM!e )ase4 on a s m)iotic relationshi+ )etween theor J moralit J an4 +olitics. F!rtherJ it is !n4erwritten ) anethical 'o!n4ation )ase4 on minimi in the !nha++iness o' the +oor an4 s!''erin an4 maximi in the ha++iness o' al l. Thisin ol es locatin the socio;historical so!rces o' s!''erin an4 inP!stice an4 workin to o ercome them.=ar4in 3200 5 an4 other a4herents o' stan4+oint theor ha e '!rthere4 this +roPect s!)stantiall ) incor+oratin the concerns o'raceJ sex!alit J an4 en4er into the 4isc!ssion. Takin her lea4 'rom &eor 7!k[csJ )!t alterin the 'ocal +oint 'rom the workinclassJ =ar4in has esta)lishe4 the centralit o' +ers+ecti e on research an4 the nee4 to mo e )e on4 4escri+tion to +rescri+tion.?he ar !es that the s!)or4inate +osition o''ers a more acc!rate startin +oint 'or research J as it exists +artiall or wholl o!tsi4ethe s stem an4 4isco!rse that +romote an4 s!stain as mmetries o' +ower an4 access. B attem+tin to eliminate 4ominant ro!+interests an4 al!es 'rom research J a more acc!rate ren4erin o' the worl4 is +ossi)le that can com)ine with the ethical +rinci+lesthat seek to era4icate s!''erin an4 o++ression an4 create a more P!st social or4er.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

64/74

"T# C/* !ali'ications2NC

1. < 8% 8 *8 BOT= ?T8ON& D"T" "ND T= " T=O8 TO B "7*F* D2. T= E DONHT % T ; NOT V 8E C"8D T= E 8 "D *? ( "7*F* D,

:. $ % T "77 O 8 D"T" C"8D? "8 F8O% ( "7*F* D,

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

65/74

"T# C/*

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

66/74

Data# Ca+italism &oo42NC

C"

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

67/74

D"T" ?"% C*T

&art ke 0AI rik &art ke associate professor of political science and a member of the Saltzman Institute of War andPeace Studies Columbia University The Capitalist Peace "merican o!rnal o' 1J No. 1J

an!ar 200AJ

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

68/74

Data# N!clear Deterrence &oo41NC

N C7 "8 $ "J the 166>19 +erio4 is incl!4e4 so that rea4ers can com+are these 'in4in s with +re io!sst!4ies an4 know that the res!lts 4i''er onl )eca!se o' the a44ition o' aria)les that meas!re the +resence o' n!clear wea+ons.Tests +er'orme4 on a 4ata set restricte4 to the 19 2000 +erio4 4i4 not noticea)l alter the statistical or s!)stanti e e''ects o'n!clear wea+ons.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

69/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

70/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

71/74

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

72/74

"FF "ns !antitati e

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

73/74

"FF 8easona)ilit

8 "?ON"B*7*TE ; ?T B C" ? T= E $*N T= *8 *NT 8< *? ?7*&=T7E B TT 8 FO8 D B"T

DO ?NHT % "N EO ?=O 7D VOT FO8 *T B C" ? AL IctL

FirstJ lo ical +ositi ism is ina++ro+riate )!t necessar . 7o ical +ositi ism 4enies that how we think a''ects c!lt!ral an4ecolo ical s stems. Clearl J this is not sim+l a minor shortcomin . The we) o' lo)alJ nationalJ an4 local economic an4ecolo ical +ro)lems are mani'estations o' how we ha e tho! ht a)o!t economic s stems J nat!ral scienceJ an4 the 3non5 role o'ecolo ical s stems an4 c!lt!re in the 4e elo+ment +rocess. ?+ecies an4 c!lt!res ha e )een 4ri en to extinction an4 economicallal!a)le ecolo ical +rocesses an4 c!lt!ral traits irretrie a)l lost )eca!se ecolo ical an4 c!lt!ral s stems are not mechanicals stems which can )e +!she4 to new eM!ili)ria an4 )ro! ht )ack as 4esire4. Eet lo ical +ositi ism is necessar )eca!se mo4em

+eo+le +ercei e science in terms o' o)Pecti eJ !ni ersal tr!ths. To a lar e extent mo4ern societies are or ani e4 to act on science +resente4 to it 'rom thisJ an4 onl thisJ metho4olo ical stance. ntil the illo ic o' lo ical +ositi ism is )etter known thro! ho!t societ J the !se o' lo ical +ositi ist ar !ments will )e P!sti'ie4 in certain circ!mstances . =o+e'!ll J the conscio!s !se o' lo ical

+ositi ist ar !ments will also incor+orate warnin s o' +otential 4an ers. *n an caseJ we m!st )e a) le to work with lo ical +ositi ism while 4e elo+in more a++ro+riate metho4olo ies. ?econ4J it is clearl too earl to limit the metho4olo ies !se4 inecolo ical economics now e en i' a narrower set mi ht )e a ree4 !+on later. To select a narrow set o' metho4olo ies now wo!l4eliminateJ or at least re4!ce the access toJ m!ch o' ecolo i en its m!lti+le metho4olo ies an4J !nless lo ical +ositi ism isselecte4J nearl all o' economics. The e''orts to 4ate at ecolo ical economics in the metho4olo ical intersect o' neoclassicaleconomics an4 +o+!lation )iolo J 'or exam+leJ +ro i4e er limite4 insi hts 3ClarkJ 19A 5. %ost o' the metho4olo icalintersects )etween ecolo an4 economics are sim+l too narrow to enerate interestin res!lts.

8/12/2019 Data-Fwk

74/74

Data-Fwk

Documents

Transcript of Data-Fwk