At the close of the nineteenth century, the United States of America would declare war on the Philippines. During that time, General Jacob H. Smith would convince his men to murder countless noncombatants, and President Theodore Roosevelt--and President William Mckinley who preceeded him--would persuade the American people that their occupation of the Philippines was just.

During World War Two, and before it, as well, Adolf Hitler convinced his countrymen not only that the Jews were the cause of all their problems but, furthermore, that the Jews were a subspecies requiring extermination.

In the eleventh century, Pope Urban the Second would help instigate the First Crusade against the Muslims. "Undertake this journey for the remission of your sins," he would say, "with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the Kingdom of Heaven!"

Jesus of Nazareth would convince some Jews that he was the Messiah; Emperors of China would convince their subjects that they held the Mandate of Heaven; Donald Trump convinced many Americans that America is not great and only he can "Make America Great Again!"

Words, it is clear, have power.


Sonic Debates


Sonic Debates are for those who are looking to test their ideas against another person's. I will explain the format of each debate, how the winner will be decided, some basic rules, how debators and jurors will be chosen, and how topics will be chosen.

Debate Format


First, each debator will begin with an opening argument that is no more than 500 words long. There is no criteria for what your opening argument should include. However, it is wise to explain what you are going to prove, how you are going to prove it, what your opponent might say--and how they would be incorrect in saying this--and so on. Think of your opening argument as an informal essay: first person pronouns are allowed, witticism is encouraged, and profundity is unbecoming and most of you do it poorly, anyways.

Note: The person who goes second can use a portion of his opening argument to critique some of the things that the first person said. However, this will take words away from providing your own argument so it is suggested that you wait for the rebuttal period to really dig into your opponent's argument.

Second, after the opening argument, we will have a time for rebuttal. The rebuttals will also be no longer than 500 words. Use this time to challenge any ideas that your opponent made during his opening argument, and assert why your ideas are correct.

Note: Please, don't attack the debator; attack the ideas that the debator makes. Attacking the debator normally results in an immediate loss but for this I will just give a warning and if you do it again, then you will lose by default. If you don't know what I mean by attacking the debator, then consider the following example.

Person A: I think that the earth is flat.

Person B: Well, you're stupid.

Person: You hurt my feelings and you've said nothing about my argument!

Third, this is an opportunity for an open, unmoderated discussion between the debators. The debators can use this time to ask questions, point out inconsistencies that they may have missed earlier, and even agree with certain things that their opponent might have said without agreeing with their main point. Either debator can post five times each and the posts must be no longer than 250 words. Use this time to flesh out your ideas and press the debator to give you an answer to a question that they might have been dodging earlier. Literally, anything goes as long as it is consistent with the debate rules--which I will explain below--and the RPA rules.

Fourth, the jurors can take this time to ask the debators questions on anything relating to their arguments. The questions can be for both debators, or for one debator. However, they are only questions; not comments or opinions.

Fifth, the two debators deliver their closing arguments. This should be no longer than 250 words.
Take this time to summarize your arguments and reassert why the jurors should agree with you.

How The Winner Will Be Decided

Each debate will have a panel of "jurors". Ideally I would like for there to be at least six jurors but no more than twelve. After the closing arguments, each juror will say if they agree with one debator or the other. An explanation can accompany their decision if they would like, but that is not mandatory. Normally, the debator's decision will look something like "I AGREE WITH _________".

Whichever debator receives the most support from the jurors will win. If it is a tie, then neither debator wins. The jurors can, of course, consult with each other over PMs if they wish, but they are not allowed to consult with the debators, at least not about the debate.

Some Basic Rules

  1. Don't attack another debator; attack their opinions.
  2. Any points you make must be referenced. Please, put in paranthesis where you got your information. For example, "In the beginning" (Genesis 1:1). I will fact check all your arguments that do not have a reference. So, if it turns out that your argument is factually wrong, then I will point that out and ask you to fix it. (References will not be included in your word count).
  3. Don't go over the word limits, please.
  4. All RPA rules apply.
  5. And have fun!!!!


How Debators and Jurors Will Be Chosen


Volunteering <3

How Topics Will Be Chosen

Normally, I will choose a topic. But, if someone would like to suggest a topic, then they can just PM me.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, to those of you who are wondering why I am so interested in debating it is becuase my school hosts this thing called Munk Debates where all these prominent scholars come in and dish it out. Here is a teaser: