debate – Page 6 – The Literific

This House Believes Science Has Damned Us All.

Posted on 22/05/2014 by The Literific in Uncategorized

The 9^th Ordinary meeting of the 165^th session of the Literary and Scientific society took place on the 28^th of November in the Senate Room.

Matthew Allen, Dr. Stephen Goss and James McAlister proposed the motion. Allen opened the debate with a very interesting account of past philosophers and anthropologists (I think). He ended by reading a lovely poem to the House in its native Swedish. Yes. Goss brought up scientific theories that have been widely accepted but which have since been disproven and asked if it was worthwhile condemning ourselves for this. James McAlister compared our society’s way of life to that of the Amish who follow the bible for guidance and concluded that we will inevitably be damned by our advancements. However, he also said that we should just roll with it and be damned.

Fionnbharr Rodgers, Nick Millington and Dr David Timson opposed the debate. Fionn advised the House to ignore the extremists who create conflict as they are not a fair representation of either side. Mr Millington argued that heaven, the option other than being damned, has been raised in people’s minds but that in reality it may not be so wonderful. Dr Timson, our guest, said that science is good, that it has enhanced our lives in many ways; he argued that if science has damned us then God help the Vatican who sponsor science.

The debate then went to the floor.
Both sides summarised, the proposition in Swedish and we went to a vote. The motion was defeated.

Godkin Debate: This House Believes Too Many People Go to University

Posted on 22/05/2014 by The Literific in Uncategorized

The 8^th meeting of the 165^th Session of the Literific took place on the 21^st of November in the Senate Room. Despite what President Kydd says, it was in fact our 3^rd annual Godkin Debate and not our 165^th.

Emma Chadwick, Connor Hogan and Aisha Sobey were battling for maiden speaker on the proposition. Emma argued that encouraging everyone to go to university would be bad for those not suited to it, those that are and responsible for the economy which we are currently seeing. He claimed that university degrees are becoming worthless and that they are not required for economic growth. Aisha told the House that university shouldn’t be a social expectation and that life skills are heard in the work place, not in lecture theatres.

Ben Murphy, Aaron Toleman and Harry Adair argued for the opposition. Murphy claimed that universities should change to suit everyone but as it stands it doesn’t allow a lot of people to go. Toleman said that you are more likely to get a job if you have a degree than if not and that there is a causation between going to university and having a healthy diet, exercising and not smoking. Adair explained that the only reason we have an established academic nature is because university is open to all and it should remain so.

The debate then went to the floor.
We went to a vote and the motion passed.
Paul Shannon, our eternal leader, then went through everyone’s speeches and the winner announced was… Connor Hogan! Congrats!

This House Would Ban Designer Babies

Posted on 22/05/2014 by The Literific in Uncategorized

The 6^th Ordinary Meeting of the 165^th session of the Literific took place on the 7^th of November in the Senate Room. We were joined by the University of Ulster for a war between universities!

Professor McClure ‘set the scene’ by explaining a bit about genetics. There was a little bit of UU hating.

Representing QUB on proposition were Patrick Mallon, Aisha Sobey, Nathan Cantley and James McAlister. Mallon urged the House to embrace natural differences as designer babies would doom our society. Sobey went on to explain that designer babies would only be an option for the rich, resulting in an elite ruling class. Nathan Cantley asked the House how far? He explained that since many genetic disorders are connected to the environment it would not be possible to fully get rid of genetic disorders. McAlister commented that these designer babies would either suffer from low self-esteem or would have a false sense of superiority, e.g. a generation of douchebags.

Representing University of Ulster on opposition were Greene, Catterson, Thomas and Smyth (first names have…disappeared, sorry!) Greene spoke of the advantages of legalising it for medical uses for carriers of a disease who may choose not to have children for fear of passing it on. Catterson talked of our right to freedom and that we could not force a decision on a parent. Thomas highlighted the need for genetic engineering for medical use as it would be a great tool to prevent future suffering. Smyth explained that genetic engineering could remove some of the strain on the NHS in the future and would also prevent pain and suffering.

We then got to hear from Professor McClure again who was really kind of mean to everyone, it was beautiful and sassy. The motion then went to a vote and passed 34 to 32.