Derren Brown – The Experiments Derren Brown returns with The Experiments - a brand new four-part series. Each stand-alone episode asks and answers a single question, featuring the inventive and jaw-dropping Derren Brown mixture of stunts, suggestions and thought- provoking entertainment. These elements are combined with tried and tested psychological experiments to illustrate how easily our behaviour can be manipulated.1. The Assassin2. The Gameshow3. The Guilt trip4. The Secret of LuckAs we watch each episode try to thinkhow this is linked to Philosophy and howthis can help us next year.
So what is a debate?A debate involves a discussion of the pros and cons of anissue. Debating successfully is all about using argument andpersuasion to convince other people that your views areright.1. Research: Research the subject, so that you have facts to back up your views. It helps to validate your answer so it becomes more than just your opinion.2. Logic: Use logic to develop your case and make your points. Lead each point on from what you were previously saying. That way you build up a story and expand your answer.3. Counter arguments: Its always good to be prepared so consider the counter arguments in advance. That way the other side cant catch you out and youre always prepared.4. Keep an open mind: Be open minded and prepared to change your opinion if you the other side convinces you your argument is flawed.5. Dont get personal: In the heat of a debate its easy to lose your cool and attack the other person for having a different opinion to you. But remember theyre entitled to that opinion and just because they dont think the same as you its not a bad thing.6. Stay Focused: Stick to the subject being debated and dont stray into other areas. It sounds obvious but its easy to do once you start debating.
The Proposition The OppositionSpeaker 1 – Must Speaker 1 – Mustintroduce the topic to introduce the topic tothe audience and the audience andpresent the main present the mainargument that supports argument that is againstthe motion the motion Speaker 2 – MustSpeaker 2 – Must elaborate on the pointselaborate on the points made by speaker 1 bymade by speaker 1 by presenting two furtherpresenting two further arguments against thearguments for the motion.motion. Evaluator – Must take questions from theEvaluator – Must take audience and attemptquestions from the to answer them. Theyaudience and attempt to must then make a shortanswer them. They must summery of their keythen make a short points.summery of their keypoints.
The AudienceMust research both topics and decide whether theyagree or disagree with the motion. They must thencompile five possible questions to ask both theproposition and the opposition.At the end of the debate the audience must decideindividually if their opinions changed or remained thesame as a result of the debate. Chair PersonThe proposition and the opposition must each have achair person. The chair person assists with the speechwriting and during the debate introduces each speakerand is the time keeper. Each of the three speakers fromeach team have 3 minutes to talk. It is the chair personsjob to clap twice at the end of each minute and clapthree times at the end of the three minutes. Speakerswill lose points if they go over three minutes.
What do you need to do?• A motion will be given which each team has to debate upon – your team will either present arguments from the proposition or from the opposition.• Each team will have THREE members – speaker 1, speaker 2 and the evaluator.• Speaker 1 proposition.• Speaker 1 opposition.• Speaker 2 proposition.• Speaker 2 opposition.• Evaluator proposition.• Evaluator opposition.• Audience comments and vote.
Motion 1 - This House believes that God existsThe question of God’s existence forms a fundamental part oftheology, philosophy, and life generally. Religion is one of the mostprofound and pervasive institutions, appearing in virtually everyculture and in every time. Serious questioning of the existence ofGod has only become part of common discourse in the past threecenturies, however, as state-sponsored religion and religious crimeshave faded from the Western world. Increasing scientificknowledge has also led people to question belief in the existence ofGod. Since there are many arguments on both sides of the debateabout God’s existence, it is necessary to limit the focus of thisdiscussion. This debate will therefore take place largely within theparameters of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, andIslam), and will focus on the arguments for and against theAbrahamic conception of God.Show lesshttp://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/philosophical-political-theory/house-believes-god-exists
Motion 2 - This house believes that Anarchism is a valuable political ideologyAnarchism is an ideology that believes that the state is anundesirable and unnecessary. Whilst a descent into anarchy canbe used in modern language to describe a decline towards a stateof chaos, anarchists believe that a stateless society would be amuch better place to live; they point to anarchist communes likeFreetown Christiania in Copenhagen as places of peace andcontentment free from the state.There are two ways to define this debate and I have tried toinclude both of them on this page, firstly one can talk about howanarchy is a worthwhile goal in and of its self and how a statelessworld would be superior to the one we live in. Secondly it ispossible to argue that Anarchism provides an essential voice in aworld where people are much too keen to listen to and do exactlywhat the state tells them.http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/philosophical-political-theory/house-believes-anarchism-valuable-political-ideology
Motion 3 -This house would make voting compulsoryIn many countries around the world individuals are free tochoose to vote or not to vote, while in other countries(Australia, a couple cantons in Switzerland, Belgium andSingapore , for example) it is compulsory for citizens to vote.Punishment for non-voting can vary from a $15 fine to thepossible deprivation of government services or the freezing ofones bank account. Is this a violation of an individual’s freedomof choice? With the citizens of many countries fighting for theirright to vote, is it right that US voting turnout hovers around 50 –60%of registered voters 1? Should voting be seen as a duty or aright? This debate explores whether compulsory voting improvesvoter participation, increases voter awareness on key politicalissues, and reduces the powers of special interest groups. http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/philosophical- political-theory/house-would-make-voting-compulsory