Event Title: “From Duel to Dialogue: Ending Epistemic Violence in the Academy”
Location: The Amphitheatre of Gentle Exchange (formerly the Debate Hall)
Organised by:
-
The Dialogic Nonviolence Network
-
Students for Collaborative Uncertainty
-
The Anti-Binary Working Group
Trigger Warning: Contains references to "points" being "scored"
SLOGAN:
“We don’t debate. We cocoon, reflect, and emerge.”
OPENING REMARKS: ASHLEIGH (she/her)
Spoken softly, with no microphone (to avoid amplificatory colonialism)
Debate is not dialogue. It is epistemic MMA in business casual.
Every time someone says “let’s hear both sides,” a nuance dies.
Debate reduces rich lived truths to soundbites measured in applause.
We don’t need winners. We need witnesses.
We don’t want “arguments.” We want polyphonic tenderness.
SLIDE: THE HARMS OF DEBATE
-
Frames disagreement as combat, not curiosity
-
Centres confidence over care
-
Rewards quickness instead of slowness, complexity, or gentle confusion
-
Normalises “point-scoring,” “rebuttals,” and “owning” opponents
-
Traumatises students with introverted nervous systems
REPLACEMENT FRAMEWORK: THE “CIRCLES OF MUTUAL Tending™”
| Debate Concept | Curated Replacement |
|---|---|
| Opposing views | Divergent knowings |
| Rebuttal | Compassionate redirection |
| Moderator | Emotional atmosphere co-regulator |
| Winner | Emergent plurality |
| “You’re wrong” | “I honour your truth-path, though I do not mirror it” |
KEY PETITION DEMANDS:
-
Immediate suspension of all formal debates on campus.
-
Creation of Listening Sanctuaries for unresolved co-thinking.
-
Replace student debating societies with Circles of Tentative Sharing, where everyone brings snacks and a dream they had once.
-
“Debate Club” to be renamed “The Ambiguity Garden.”
GUEST SPEAKER: PROFESSOR MIRA ETHERWALK (they/fae)
Chair of Radical Uncertainty and Tea-Based Pedagogy
Every debate is haunted by its Enlightenment roots—competitive, binary, phallologocentric.
Socrates did not win debates. He wandered. He annoyed. He made people feel weird and think harder.
Our proposal: replace every adversarial forum with a collective murmur. Students speak when moved, not when called. Thought flows like soup.
STUDENT TESTIMONIALS:
ZIN (they/them):
In first year, I lost a debate about climate change. Not because I was wrong—but because I paused too long while feeling things. Never again.
KAI (they/them):
I now express disagreement using interpretive dance and shadows. No one claps, but everyone cries a little.
CLOSING RITUAL: “LAYING DOWN OUR POINTS”
Each attendee brings a physical point (thumbtack, dart, PowerPoint slide) and lays it gently in a handwoven basket. A chant begins:
No more sides. No more wins.
Let our knowing flow like kin.
EPILOGUE:
University administration releases official statement:
“We recognise the harm caused by centuries of debate culture. Going forward, all public events must follow the Hesitation-First Protocol™, where uncertainty is not punished but praised. Arguing will be replaced by Emotive Layering. The annual Debate Championship will be replaced by the Festival of Diverging Thoughts (with beanbags).”
No comments:
Post a Comment