The Blackett Debate

The motion for the debate was “This House regrets the Manhatten Project.” Eight Physics students and Debaters locked horns in the form of British Parliamentary debate, as they discussed the merits – or the lack thereof – of nuclear bombs. 

Speaking to Sahil Khandelwal, President of Debate Society, and Elias Fink, President of Physoc, the motion was chosen because of there were many “great points to make. We saw a lot of ethical discussion, a lot of moral discussion.” Elias also pointed out that the debaters discussed the “economics” and “viability, which wouldn’t have been as pronounced” if other motions were followed. Sahil was the Chief Adjudicator of the event, meaning he was responsible for both ensuring the rules of debate were followed, moderating the judges, as well as coming up with the motion.

Several of the competitors made cogent and astute points related to how nuclear proliferation has led to negative implications that international relations, whilst those in opposition spoke of how nuclear weaponry has caused relative peace due to its use as a deterrent. 

It’s impressive to see how the competitors rose to the occasion, with many of them participating for the very first time.  However, the debate was full–time, meaning it was eight seven–minute rounds. It felt drawn out, and I think it would have helped if the debates were a little shorter. 

Students present enjoyed the event, with one student even making flowcharts of every argument put forward by the debaters. 

Both societies hope to turn this into a regular event due to the feedback, with Sahil saying he would “love” to do it again.