Positions

At its core, mythology is meant to help people better understand, relate to, and connect with the world around them, as well as the conflicts inside of themselves.

This position holds that the purpose of mythology is divine revelation. It argues that myths are not mere fairy tales or comforting metaphors but literal accounts of real divine beings — sacred truths handed down, and still believed by adherents, rather than invented stories.

This position holds that mythology manifests humanity's subconscious. It argues that myths serve as gateways to the hopes, fears and desires locked within the human psyche — that they are, in effect, the dreams of a culture, expressing collectively what individuals dream alone.

This position holds that the purpose of mythology is to unite societies. It argues that by creating common beliefs and encouraging shared, widely practised rituals, myths bind entire cultures together — giving disparate people a common story and identity to hold in common.

This position holds that Narendra Modi enables terrorism without being a terrorist himself. It argues that through his actions he facilitates acts of terror—pointing to his alleged failure to halt the 2002 Gujarat violence and contending that his rhetoric inflames communal tensions.

Nas' discography is as deep as they come. Illmatic is considered one of the best hip-hop albums of Nas' generation, if not of all time. Nas' is considered the second coming of legendary artist Rakim, and Nas' albums are frequently cited as influences by an up-and-coming generation of rappers.

This position holds that nationalism and nation states emerged hand in hand, neither preceding the other. It argues both grew out of a new awareness of geography—shaped by fifteenth-century mapmaking and exploration—that defined territories and the peoples within them.

This position holds that nations are modern creations. It argues they only emerged from the late eighteenth century amid sweeping political, social, and economic change, driven by Enlightenment ideas, industrialisation, and the rise of print capitalism rather than ancient roots.

This position holds that nations are natural communities, not modern inventions. It argues they rest on long-standing ethnic ties, shaped by territory and kinship, and on a shared cultural heritage — language, religion, myth, values — that binds a people across continuous history.

This position holds that nations are fundamentally tools of coercion — a means for elites to control the population. It argues that nationalism shades into illiberalism and imperialism, that 'the working men have no country', and that all states are ultimately instruments of coercive power.

This position holds that nations mean liberty. It argues that the nation is the natural home of self-determination and democracy — the best arena in which a free people can govern itself — and that nationhood, far from being uniform, encompasses real internal diversity.

This position holds that NATO will eventually be dismantled, no longer serving a real purpose. It argues that the alliance is too expensive, that it belongs to the Cold War era that produced it, and that the EU is poised to take a greater role in European defence and security.

This position holds that NATO will continue in its traditional role. It argues that the alliance remains an effective deterrent against Russian aggression, and that this enduring security function keeps it relevant rather than obsolete or in need of reinvention.

This position holds that NATO will take on a renewed role in the 21st century. It argues that the alliance will increasingly operate beyond Europe — extending its stabilising missions to regions such as Afghanistan, North Africa and the Middle East — rather than fading or dissolving.

This position holds that nature and nurture are inseparable. It argues the two are so intertwined that neither can exist without the other, and that humans are shaped by nature acting through nurture—a single woven process rather than competing forces.

This position holds that nature matters more than nurture. It argues that genetics determine who a person is long before their experiences shape them — that even the way we learn is innate — so our biological inheritance, not our environment, is the primary force behind who we become.

NCAA athletes dedicate about 40 hours per week to their sport. They dedicate the same amount of time to their sport that the average person does to their job, so they should be paid accordingly.

This position holds that NCAA athletes should not be paid. It argues that they are students first, already compensated through athletic scholarships — and that introducing salaries would force other programmes to be cut, while deciding who gets paid would be hopelessly arbitrary.

This position holds that neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden will do enough for the environment. It argues neither treats the climate crisis as the emergency it is, that both fall short on green transport and zero waste, and that both accept money from energy executives.

This position holds that neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden offers a good approach to policing. It argues that critics on both the left and right find both candidates wanting, with some maintaining that the only viable option is to defund the police.

This position holds that neither the chicken nor the egg came first. It argues the question poses a false dichotomy and an essentially infinite sequence, with no true 'first' chicken or egg to identify—and that having no definitive answer is perfectly fine.

Net neutrality regulation hinders innovation and development in our internet products, preventing the emergence of more effective practices and more practical business models.

Net neutrality prevents internet providers from becoming the gatekeepers of competition, information, and morality in the digital space. It promotes innovation and quality service for lesser-known sites.

This position holds that net-zero carbon is achievable through a measured, long-term approach. It argues that, with careful planning and new legislation, the goal is viable for all nations—pointing to renewable energy as the way forward and shifting public attitudes as cause for hope.

This position holds that net-zero carbon targets are insufficient to prevent dangerous climate change. It argues that the 'net' relies on negative-emission technologies that barely exist yet, and that the refusal of many large nations to cut emissions will fatally undermine the targets' aims.

This position holds that net-zero carbon is unachievable on current targets. It argues that the world's deep dependency on fossil fuels makes the deadlines unrealistic, and that the divergent, often counter-productive approaches in use mean a change in expectations and method is needed.

I would most wish to see Nigel Farage offered a one-way ticket.

This position holds that ending climate change does not require ending capitalism, arguing market forces can be harnessed to tackle it. It points to approaches like Green Keynesianism and the Green New Deal, and to "true cost" pricing that accounts for carbon.

Meat contains important nutrients such as Vitamin B6 and B12 that are more difficult to obtain when eating plant-based, especially for those who lack time and resources for getting supplements or specific groceries.

The putative environmental benefits associated to ending meat and dairy consumption are not significative when compared to other forms of pollution such as the one from the transportation or the chemical processing sectors

This position holds that we should reduce, not eliminate, meat and dairy for the environment. It argues that cutting livestock products to a sustainable level would ease their environmental harm — and that expecting everyone to give up meat entirely is simply unrealistic.

This position argues colleges should hold the Fall 2020 semester online rather than reopen campuses. It holds that in-person classes risk outbreaks, that students congregating will spread infection, and that planning ahead is impossible amid such uncertainty.

Chatbots fabricate facts, citations and reasoning with the same confidence as they produce true ones, and erode the very skills they appear to extend. The cost of verifying their output, plus the slow loss of the user's own competence, exceeds whatever convenience they deliver.

This position holds that 'Jack the Ripper' was not a single person. It argues that the marked differences between the Whitechapel murders — the lack of a consistent modus operandi — suggest the killings were the work of several hands rather than one lone serial killer.