Tournament: Illinois State | Round: 3 | Opponent: Wayne State | Judge: Brian DeLong
A. Link – The affirmative’s approach and objectives are thoroughly anthropocentric – they view the environment as a resource to be used for human benefit, they center their justification for action around humanity’s survival and subjugate all other needs of nature to the interests of humanity.  This approach denies nature’s intrinsic worth and precludes a deep ecological approach.
Taylor 98 (Prudence Taylor, Senior Lecturer in Law at University of Auckland (New Zealand), 1998 10 Geo. Int’l Envtl. L. Rev. 309, L/N)
There is very…requires human protest.

B. Impact – Anthropocentrism causes extinction—it divorces our relationship with the natural world and makes ecocide inevitable.
Gottlieb 94 (Roger S. Gottlieb, Professor of Humanities at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Brandeis University, “Ethics and Trauma: Levinas, Feminism, and Deep Ecology,” Crosscurrents: A Journal of Religion and Intellectual Life, Summer, Available Online at http://www.crosscurrents.org/feministecology.htm)
Here I will…for us all.

C. Alternative –

VOTE NEGATIVE – reject the affirmative’s anthropocentric approach in favor of a shift towards deep ecology.

This round represents a starting point for creating a genuine encounter with the otherness of nature by providing context for a shared conversation with the world around us.  Questioning our own subject position starting with the consideration of anthropocentrism creates space for constructing a systematic framework that allows for the ethical connection with the world.
Weston 91 (Anthony Weston, “Non-Anthropocentrism in a Thoroughly Anthropocentrized World,” 1991 Trumpeter, 8.3, http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/459/760)
I have argued…begin to say.