IHC Debate 2017
It has been an exciting two weeks here at IEGS as we have just had our yearly inter-house Debate Competition! Starting the week off strong was the first debate starring the former champions from King House and the seasoned Curie. Representing King were Benjamin , Akshat and Andreas and on the opposite side representing Curie were Douglas, Katarina and Nada. The first debate had the motion that Extremist Groups should be Banned in Sweden. The debate started with the proposition clearly laying out their points in a detailed matter explaining how the current political situation in Sweden has been defined by violence, motioning that groups advocating for violence and hatred be forcibly removed by jurisdiction. The opposition then strongly started debating against the motion stating that Freedom of Speech is a right given to you by the Swedish constitution and banning this simple right would contradict the Swedish constitution as a whole. As the debate continued we saw both sides use knowledge and wit to get their point across to their audience. However at the end of the debate King came out victorious as the panel of judges deemed their arguments to be the strongest.
Then on Wednesday the debates continued. This time we had Russell Vs Pavlov debating If the World would be a Better Place without Facebook. Representing Russell was Agnes Printz, Mariam Elsayed and Esther-Pouline Garðshorn, who were going up against Pavlov, a team of brave first-time debaters from SP1D, Sheena, Anna and Lee as the proposition with Russell in opposition. Pavlov had a hard task to support the idea of 'banning' Facebook to prevent abuses, bringing up the dangers of fake news and increased polarisation of social groups. Russell won with strong arguments for personal responsibility and access to information as a tool of democracy.
After the two very intense debates last week it had to come to a climax, now only two teams were left standing: King and Russell House. For the final the topic was, ‘’Governments should suppress all research to develop strong Artificial Intelligence’. The proposition started out by arguing for the motion stating that strong or ‘autonomous’ Artificial Intelligence comes with huge risks if uncontrolled and will have unimaginable consequences for society in terms of social, economic and political impacts. The opposition countered by stressing the benefits to humanity using the powerful problem-solving skills implied in AI. After an hour of rigorous debating the proposition were declared the winners, and King House collected yet another winning debate trophy for 2017. Will King House be able to replace these graduating debaters with a strong team next year?
/ Lukas Lagerfors EC3H