Getting away without researching when you got yourself loaded with philosophies?

[hellfire1234]

Can that happen?

[MajesticTOASTER]

Well, yes, it's possible. There are some judges that actually like hearing that kind of thing, and it would give your case an unexpected twist.

Except sooner or later you will run into some snotty smarty pants judge who'll be like "WHERE'S MY STATISTICS, FOO?!" and then he'll give you the auto-boot.

So my advice, don't do it. It's better to be safe than sorry.
:]

[hellfire1234]

Well, yes, it's possible. There are some judges that actually like hearing that kind of thing, and it would give your case an unexpected twist.

Except sooner or later you will run into some snotty smarty pants judge who'll be like "WHERE'S MY STATISTICS, FOO?!" and then he'll give you the auto-boot.

So my advice, don't do it. It's better to be safe than sorry.
:]

How about empirical evidences? Because based upon what I observed throughout competitions, regular evidences tend to get challenge through twisty use of fallacies but rarely happen for empirical evidences.

[Celtic_Fire]

It depends on how logical your philosophy sounds. If you put in your own random research involving things that could never happen, such as zombie attacks, it could turn out pretty bad. Just don't do anything too crazy and you should be fine.

[DevinKelsey]

It can def. work well.

Like, I would probably have some stats as backup at least in a brief packet (even if you haven't read them)....but if you REALLY know your philosophy, you can get away with it. No doubt.

I once won a Champ LD tourn (really small tourn though) with 5 pieces of paper- 3 papers for an Aff Case and 2 for a Neg.....that was on the "Kill 1 to Save More" topic though. On a topic like THAT, any smart person can win without evidence.

On Jury Nullification? No. You can't do it. It all depends on the topic.

[Doomy]

It depends on how logical your philosophy sounds. If you put in your own random research involving things that could never happen, such as zombie attacks, it could turn out pretty bad. Just don't do anything too crazy and you should be fine.

Well, crap. There goes my argument.

The just-posted topic (March/April 2010) is what we're using for our next debate (It came out five days ago, so my resources are limited and statistic-research time is crammed) but Jury Nullification is mostly philosophical anyway. Anyone think we (my team and I) could get away without too many statistic points?