An exciting Inter-House Debating Semi-Final...

Blackford House vs New House

The Blackford versus New House debate was a clash of the titans, debating whether billionaires are immoral. These two houses have a history of either being in the final, or being very close so adjudicating the semi finals today was, to me, like the final. The teams were well rehearsed, although with the Head Boy stuck on a train somewhere in Somerset, it meant that the Blackford reserve Toby, had to step up. This was impressive, especially as he performed confidently and persuasively. The amount of research on both sides was impressive, giving examples of how various billionaires spend their money and how much they give to charity. Clearly, said New House, if we were to do away with billionaires, we would have to do away with the whole capitalist system. Tax avoidance and ending world poverty was also discussed. New House were keen to point out that it was a blanket assumption to say that all billionaires are immoral but Blackford won overall, with their keen and well placed point of information, strict time keeping and confident style, winning by one point: 43 to 42.

Alison Grant - Deputy Head

Wellesley House vs Lyon House

The semi-final debate between Wellesley House & Lyon House was one of the closest semi-final debates I have had the pleasure to witness and adjudicate at King’s Bruton. Both teams had clearly spent many hours preparing and practicing their arguments. Wellesley House put forward an incredibly convincing proposition argument: 'the more money you have, the more power you have'. This often leads to vast amounts of corruption and manipulation which cannot be seen as fair in our world today. Lyon House worked very hard at engaging with Wellesley’s arguments. One hypothetical situation Lyon House proposed was the fact that if any one of us was to win the EuroMillions lottery this weekend, according to Wellesley House, we would instantly become immoral overnight. The debate moved towards trying to die down what makes something truly moral/immoral with both teams proposing strong arguments on either side. The floor debate was very healthy with many questions coming from both houses. At times the debate became a bit boisterous and boorish. Whilst enthusiasm is encouraged, it was emphasised during feedback that it is important to show respect towards people who we disagree with. We can passionately oppose someone’s viewpoint, but crucially we must do this with courtesy and good manners (not just in debates, but in all arenas of life!). In the end, Lyon House just pipped Wellesley House by 44 points to 43. Wellesley must not be disheartened; one thing is certain: the future of debating in Wellesley House is very bright indeed!

George Beverly - Chaplain and History & Philosophy Teacher

Flickr album: Inter-House Debating - Semi Final - 10th February 2020 | Height: auto | Theme: Default