12 minute Oxford style debating - engaging, fun and interesting short form arguments on contemporary issues...
Dirk Primbs and Sebastian Trzcinski-Clément
Yes, it is true - 2debate ends today. This episode is a final greeting from Lydia, Sebastian and Dirk
Sebastian: The Olympics should be cancelled! Dirk: Technology will make professional photographers obsolete! Lydia: Visibility leads to Equality!
Today we debated themes as far apart as bringing back extinct species on one hand and the question of NFT powered bubbles or travel bans to safe the environment on the other... Also we derailed the trivia section, but in a good way :-)
Debating motions: Dirk: Teenagers should be allowed to vote! Lydia: Experts, not politicians should rule! Sebastian: No one will stop China from clawing back Taiwan! And - Trivia!
Our two debaters meet this time to ponder life's big questions and to find out if clubhouse is worth trying...
2debate is back in your ears, this time with a third debater and three amazing motions! Was twitter right about banning Trump? Is closing borders accomplishing anything? Is it ok to show a cartoon about a guy with a rope-like penis on chrildrens TV? Plus: Ukulele and Alpacas! Lydia, Sebastian and Dirk don't quite agree on their positions but we had a blast arguing and hope you can hear that.
This episode is different. Instead of debating Sebastian and Dirk decided to look back on 99 debates and 5 special episodes and speak about what's next for 2debate...
Today's episode looks at the trend called "social scoring" where 'good' behavior earns positive scores and 'bad' behaviour is 'punished' with lower scores. Now, Sebastian will argue that this will be a force for good in the world while Dirk thinks this may be decremental to freedom, democracy and society at large... It is up to you to decide who had the better arguments.
2d96 - Only save companies from bankruptcy if they are committing to a reduction of carbon emissions
2d95 - Electric transportation is key to climate change!
2d94 - The world is incapable of dealing with a global pandemic!
2d93 - A street photographer has the right to publish your picture, even against your will!
2d92 - Enough is enough, impeach Trump now!
2d90 - Publicly-available e-scooters are a terrible idea and should be banned!
2d89 - Football is ridiculous/idiotic
2d88 - The European Union is nothing but an economic entity!
2d87 - Any country should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
2d85 - Is Iran a rogue state lurking in the shadows?
2d84 - Huawei’s ban is purely political and not based on facts
2d83 - Uber will never be profitable!
2d82 - Art should be appreciated irrespective of its creator’s unacceptable behaviour
2d81 - It is dangerous to change laws immediately after an emotional event
Recently there was an Opinion piece in the New York Times where a former facebook manager made a case for breaking up facebook. Here is our take on these arguments - let us know where you land in this debate: https://2debate.eu/2d80
What weights heavier - the changed communication style of a younger generation or the respect towards those who lost loved ones and may be offended by actions they perceive as a lack of dignity and respect?
New Zealand acted fast after the infamous shooting in Christchurch. Aside from changes in the gun laws it also censored the manifest and the video the shooter distributed and even criminalised the possession and distribution. Is that really legitimate or is it an unbalanced act of censorship?
Europeans like to point to everyone else and state that other states do not respect privacy or protect its citizen from unlawful data collection while it looks like they're acting very similarly. Are EU countries surveillance states just like it is said to be the case with China?
Is your dietary choice indeed a black and white issue?
I didn't do it (or if I did, I had a "good" reason) We all want to think we are law-abiding citizens. Yet we would prove unable to know or even understand all the laws of our country of residence, let alone of the countries we visit. Perhaps worse, while we hold a perfect image of ourselves when it comes to respecting the law, it's in stark contrast of what actually happens – perhaps not in the case of everyone, but most of us. We voluntarily go slightly over the speed limit because there's really no one on the road. We feel okay to illegally download a film because we tell ourselves we would never have gone up the cinema to watch it. We shamelessly consume unauthorised substances because we do it just once in a blue moon (when I say "we", it's a general "we" to encompass you listeners and other human beings, since neither Dirk nor I do drugs, hand on heart). And so we continuously break the law for a variety of reasons. Most often it's because we deem the law to be stupid. But does that realisation entitle us to act the way we do? After all, laws were voted for (hopefully) valid reasons, by people weelected to power. It doesn't seem a democracy would work well if we suddenly decided to change the meaning, application or validity of any given law. But what if we don't live in a democracy: does that give us any entitlement – or further entitlement – to breach rules? It's once again a tricky series of questions that are not simple to answer. And that's why we debated about them, coalesced under the motion "if a law is stupid, we should break it". As usual, we flipped a coin to assign sides randomly. This time, Dirk comes up with reasons why we shouldn't break the law in any circumstance. On the other hand, Sebastian will argue that there are a number of instances which call for civil disobedience. On 2debate, we keep it simple: it's either thumbs up or thumbs down. And YOU get to choose with no risk of persecution nor retaliation. So go ahead, vote on our website to break the law – or to respect it – depending on who convinced you the most.Be safe. Sebastian & Dirk Picture: CC0, Pixabay
Playing hours on end... is that really what we should do with out time?
Trade wars are deadly. But are they really deadlier than conventional wars and is that the only measurement to take?
The internet may be still free of charge but freedom on the internet is severely under attack. How much is left? Is hope already lost?
We live in a capitalistic world based on growth and based on exploitation of resources. Is that mabe our greatest weakness when it comes to solve for problems like climate change?
2d70 - Facebook is the news, YouTube is the new TV, Spotify the new radio - we keep reinventing the wheel!
There is a lot of ugly content online and there is no doubt that illegal content needs to be removed. But what about all the other posts we keep moving out of the public discourse by enforcing community standards, safety policies and so on?
While a power struggle unfolds in Venezuela it seem like the West is picking sides. Is that ok to do?
Should Alexa or Google Home voice recordings be off limits for police and criminal investigations? Sebastian argues for just that while Dirk wonders why your recorded voice deserves more protection than your home...
This is not your regular episode but a little extra. Enjoy!
It was a unique feature of snapchat that content disappeard after a while. Today this feature is copied by many other social media apps and with laws that demand a "right to be forgotten" one might think this is a critical element of modern day privacy. But is it really?
This is a five star podcast for five star listeners by 5 star hosts... right?
What do you need more: Competency or the appeal to the masses? Is the role of a head of state more ceremonial and communicative or do we expect them to make competent decisions?
Not too long ago Canada legalized marijuana and is one of very few countries taking that step. Maybe it is not a very good idea after all?
Drones are one of these fields that grow like crazy with over 1m devices in private use in the US alone and a growing scene of drone fans. Should we put a stop to that and keep drones out of the hands of the public or is there no need for banning?
Today's episode is about the brutal murder of Jamal Kashoggi, about the Saudi regime and about the war in Yemen which it fights without any regard for the loss of civil lives and with weapons and money from the West. Can we weight one against the other? Well, Sebastian and Dirk try...
There is one thing Sebastian and Dirk agree in this debate: In a free democracy clowns and satire politicians have a right to run for office and no one should ban them. But then Dirk would insist that this not to say that having clowns in races is necessary or even critical. This debate was one of the rare examples where we were in the same room and did not debate through an online connection. Let us know if you can hear the difference :-)
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
