Over the course of the Spring Term, pupils have gathered in their Houses to compete in this year’s Inter-House Debate Contests. The contests took place over three events – Year 9, Year 10, and Year 11 – and have been hosted in the Lecture Theatre by Head of History, Mr Player.
There were plenty of heated and fiery discussions as representatives from each House battled it out for the trophy and for House glory. The quality of the debating was extremely high with each House representative rebutting and playing with words in an attempt to put forth their strong argument.
In each round, pupils had 60 seconds to argue for or against different topics, before moving to an open debate. A group of Sixth Form pupils judged the rounds, and they were looking at the clarity of arguments, use of details and facts, and the debaters’ powers of persuasion.
Year 9 – Tuesday 12 March
The first motion debated was on AI and how it is a danger, not an opportunity. Those against the statement were Skipwith and Welsh. Skipwith, while admitting that AI needed to be regulated, spoke of how AI can rapidly improve productivity as well AI’s role in health and medical data analysis. Welsh also touched on AI’s role in the medical field but also added that it had it’s uses in finance by way of budgeting. Burr, Everett, and Orchard were all in favour of the statement and each brought up different examples of how AI is more of a threat. Burr talked about how close to 300 million jobs could be lost to AI and the subsequent financial costs of this. Everett talked about how AI could be misused and lead to the loss of identity or a sense of what is real or not, while Orchard went into more detail about the impact of AI on the job industry.
The second motion debated was on money and how it does mean happiness. This led to a fiery debate with neither side of the argument prepared to yield. Welsh, arguing against the statement, argued that it is family and friends’ love that brings happiness which is priceless and cannot be bought. Skipwith was also against the statement and argued that spending time alone working hard to make money does not bring happiness if you have no one to share it with. Those in favour of the statement however, suggested that money does correlate to happiness. If you had money, you were more likely to live in a richer, safer area thus leading to living a happier life. The argument was also made that the stresses brought on by a lack of financial security suggest that money does indeed mean happiness.
Congratulations to Archie Parmar and Sam Swannell of Welsh House for taking the win in the Year 9 Inter-House Debate Contest.
Year 10 – Tuesday 27 February
The first motion debated was on the future and if we can be optimistic about the future of the world. Those in favour of the motion made reference to how technology has advanced so much over the last few decades and how it will continue to do so. However, those against the statement, arguing that we should not be optimistic, brought up climate change and the environment. Welsh, arguing against, argued that it is difficult to be optimistic about a future we are unlikely to experience. Throughout the debate of this motion, it was fantastic to hear many papers being referenced as well as the use of statistics to back up each claim.
The second motion debated was on money and how it does mean happiness. Those in favour of the statement argued that the financial security provided by money does bring happiness. The argument was also made that objects such as cars, houses, food, education, healthcare and more, all of which can be bought with money, do provide happiness. The counterargument to this, however, was that buying objects such as houses and cars only buys short-term gratification and that spending time with friends and family is what is more important.
The final motion debated was on mind-reading and if it is a superior superpower to invisibility. A more light-hearted motion in comparison to the previous two, this nonetheless did not stop the contestants from having a ferocious debate! Those in favour of the motion put forward that mind-reading would be beneficial to therapists and judges when trying to ascertain the root of a problem or the perpetrator in a crime. However, those against the motion argued that it was a gross invasion of privacy to read someone’s mind. The counterargument was made quickly after that invisibility could also be used in a manner to invade someone’s privacy.
Congratulations to T Cockings and James Middlehurst of Burr House for taking the win in the Year 10 Inter-House Debate Contest.
Year 11 – Thursday 7 March
The first motion debated was on AI and how it is a danger, not an opportunity. Welsh and Skipwith were both against the motion and were keen to put forth their arguments. Both said that the opportunities AI brings are endless and this is particularly so within the health and medical fields where data and scans can be analysed far quicker by AI than by a human. There are also advantages in education and business where productivity can be improved through the use of AI. However, Orchard, Burr, and Everett all disagreed and argued that AI is a threat. Points made included the threat to jobs and how AI would phase us out leading to job losses, reduced income, and economic instability. They also argued that AI, when misused, could create a false sense of reality leading to an inability to know what is right or wrong.
The second motion debated was on money and how it does mean happiness. Those in favour of the statement were Everett, Burr, and Orchard with all making points that money provides security and stability and thus provides happiness. Money allows for us to cover the most basic of means of which without them, would lead to unhappiness. The argument was also made that money opens the door to more opportunities and possibilities in life and can therefore lead to happiness. Skipwith and Welsh were against the motion, and both argued that money can bring extra pressure and stress. They also argued that love and family cannot be bought and that they could even be overlooked in favour of money.
Congratulations to Louis Kennedy and James Man of Orchard House for taking the win in the Year 11 Inter-House Debate Contest.
Well done to everyone for representing their Houses and thank you to Mr Player for hosting the competitions. Thank you also to the Sixth Form judges in each contest.
Flickr album: Inter-House Debating 2024 |
Height: auto |
Theme: Default | Skin: Default Skin
