I challenge L-M, choose your poison.

"But mom, i have a stack of books a mile high! !! !" Because there is no kind of obligation to read "Liar's Game" I stand in negation of the resolution. To start things off, ought implies some kind of an obligation to read this manga. This means my opponent has to prove why this option is THE option i should take upon conclusion of this round. Therefore my case will function as a list of reasons why i have no obligation to read this manga. An obligation does not imply something is good but rather there is some reason the action is a must. For example even if i like ice cream and ice cream is extremly delicious, there is no reason i ought to eat ice cream. Therefore my opponent has the burden not just to prove that reading the manga is good but there is some reason that i must read the manga in a desired world. I am going to functionaly have two positions, the first of which will be a normal case structured as a syllogism and the second will function as a disadvantage to having such an obligation. Remember my opponent must win his case and both of my cases to prove that i ought to do something. On to my case A. Ought implies that i must take an action. For example if I ought to walk the dog, then not walking the dog would be morally reprehensable (or at least criticizable). Thus if it is not ciriticizable for me to refuse to read all copies of "Liar's Game," then i would win the round (as there is no reason i ought to take that action). B. My free time is my own business. No one criticizes me for not doing an activity they like because I am my own person. As long as my free time is not directly harmful to anyone (I like stabbing people) then i can not be criticized for my actions. This round is as simple as that. Regardless of what happens after the round (I may actually choose to read "Liar Game" and then again I may not) no one will say i violated an obligation, my actions can not be criticized. Moreover to be criticizable there must be some impact. In order to ever evaluate an action as good or bad there must be some determination as to what consequence is preferable. Obligations don't stem from self desire because there is no reason to be obligated to oneself because of free will and the propensity of individuals to make choices as they see fit. Moreover, obligations to oneself would be bad as they would not allow for change in certain action one takes based on changing situations becuase the obligation would require an individual to do a certain action. If the situation changes, the obligation may actually lead to a negative impact. Thus, since individuals dont have to have obligations to themselves to make sure they take appropriate actions, obligations are only applicable to multiple individuals. This means there has to be an impact on someone else for it to be considered an obligation. There is no impact on anyone else when i read (or abstain from reading) "Liar Game" because no one will know if i do or do not read it. Therefore there can not possibly be an impact and thus there can not possibly be an obligation. OK now that the more philosophical, nature of obligation stuff is out of the way, here is the disadvantage of reading the manga; The resolution asks me to read the manga at the conclusion of this round meaning that the resolution precludes doing anything else. Now, if there is a better thing for me to do with my time at the conclusion of the debate, then by my opponents framework of "you ought to do something that is benificial/fun for you to do" then i ought to take the action that is MORE benificial or MORE fun since these actions will be mutually exclusive. Here are some things i can do with a short explanation as to why it is more benificial/fun Play basketball while listening to philosophy talks on my ipod - not only is this action more fun for me but also is a two in one, a philosophical discussion and basketball. What more could one ask? Lounge/Chess while listening to sphere - Crichton is known for amazing books, and chess is fun and educational at the same time. Not to mention Sphere is philosophical and tailored to intelectuals in that it questions the nature of scientific research and the meaning of power while at the same providing an amazing ploto (Crighton is perhaps my favorite author). Pool with friends - Friends trump knoleledge as friends are how i derive a meaning for life. I would much prefer this than reading anything, anyday. Especialy since i know i am moving soon and now only have a limited time with them while i have an unlimited time to read Liar Game which means i can read that later but i can not do this later. OPPONENTS CASE lets start by looking at the resolution "After (or assuming) this debate concludes, my opponent ought to read all available English translated issues of the "Liar Game" manga. .. " Looking at the first part (After. .. concludes) sets a specific timeframe for when i must read this manga. There are two alternatives that i could take that would mean you vote con 1. I read the manga during the debate - assuming my opponent wins his arguments, the logical conclusion should be i read the manga as soon as possible. I think i will go read it now. Reading it now does two things for me. First there is no longer a reason to read the manga at the debates conclusion and second i achieve all my opponent benifits (I become intrigued) then there is no reason to read this manga after the round. 2. I could read the manga a long time in the future. This would allow me the same benifits and also the ability to hang out with my friends who i will move away from in the next few months and allows me to do other, time important, events. Therefore my opponent must provide a reason why his impacts specifically happen at the conclusion of this debate in order to have an obligation. Now onto his argument "this series caters to intellectuals. .. Seeing as how CON is an intellectual. .. this series would more than likely prove to be intriguing reading material for him," 1. My opponent never establishes a connection between ought and intrigue, i ought to take my dog out when she needs to go to the bathroom. I am not intrigued one bit by this. 2. Im flattered to be considered an intellectual - this is not an argument 3. If something is more intrigueing to me i ought to read THAT at the time, not this since they are both mutually exclusive, im not good enough to read two books at the same time (like sitting side by side because in the same day does not exactly fit the resolution talking about at the time the debate ends). 4. My alternatives allow me to read this manga but not at the prescribed time. 5. Going off past experiences, i have not been intrigued by a single manga. Since there is no way to know if i would enjoy such a novel in advanced, then i should choose an activity off probability i would like it. This has two implications, first, there have been other activities that i have loved 100% of the time (hanging out with friends, Crichton books, basketball) which means i should take those actions, and second, historically i have not been intrigued by mangas no matter their content. Therefore i hold no such obligation.