INDUBITABLY: The Debate Podcast

Some of the biggest breakthroughs in the history of scientific and medical research have come through questionable, if not completely immoral means.  How do we balance the ethics of acknowledging the suffering of one group of victims with the desire to provide potentially life saving treatment to another?  When we personally benefit from evil actions taken in the past, do we become complicit? 

Elon Musk’s proposed 44 billion dollar takeover, and then subsequent backtracking has left the fate of Twitter in the hands of the Delaware Court of Chancery.  While it's unlikely Musk will be forced to purchase the company he no longer wants, it raises the questions of whether or not he would be good for the platform, as well as whether or not the existence of Twitter itself is good or bad for society at large.

Hunting is close to a billion dollar industry with animals from squirrels to endangered elephants finding themselves on the wrong side of a scope.  What are the moral implications of killing an animal, particularly when they have no realistic way of fighting back?  Are there practical benefits to conservation that hunting provides that might justify the action?

On this Fourth of July we celebrate our Independence Day by asking if… we should celebrate our Independence Day?  How far is too far when it comes to Patriotism?  Should we say the Pledge of Allegiance in schools?  Is America the greatest country in the world?  Would we have been better off if we had just stayed part of the British Empire?

We as a society are obsessed with True Crime.  Let’s just be blunt, opening a window to the evil humanity is capable of can be fascinating.  But when media exposes the stories of real people for all of us to consume, are the storytellers and audience just innocent observers? Or do we start to become culpable for some degree of harm to the victims of these cases? 

Millions of illegal immigrants live in the United States right now, with millions more attempting to cross the border every year.  Are these migrants an unsustainable drain on our resources, or do the economic benefits they provide outweigh the costs?  Do countries have a greater moral obligation to ensure their own citizens are cared for, or do people have an inherent right to be supported regardless of their country of origin?

Josh and Kelly go head to head in this episode, arguing over whether or not our government is stealing from us.  They tackle questions around the ethics of consent (or lack thereof), how infrastructure and services could be provided without taxation, and whether or not we actually possess the representation required to be taxed fairly.

Our memories define who we are as people.  It’s no wonder then that humans have always been fascinated by the ideas of wielding the power of perfect recall, or having the ability to forget painful experiences.  Would these tools give us more control over our work, relationships or health?  Or does the allure of control over our memory pose more dangers than benefits? 

The US and UK share a policy of “never” negotiating with terrorists.  Does this blanket policy deter future attacks or kidnappings? Or are we just condemning innocent hostages to death, leaving them abandoned in the hands of their captors?  Should we treat other similar organizations, e.g., drug cartels, gangs or PIRATES in the same way?

The answer to whether or not pineapple belongs on pizza is obvious, but have you ever considered what constitutes a pizza in the first place?  Should “experts” or critics have the right to define our food for us, or tell us what and where we should be eating?  Do certain peoples or cultures to have a rightful claim of “ownership” over traditional dishes?

The Effective Altruism movement asks people to donate more of themselves to charities, and make sure that those causes will use their resources as efficiently as possible.  Are you a less moral person for giving money to the Red Cross, if you could save more lives donating elsewhere?  Is it ok to prioritize your own family, friends or community over people living around the world who are in greater need?

Space has captured our imaginations for thousands of years, and from the Cold War to more recent contests between the ultra rich, countries and corporations alike are racing to stake their claim to the heavens.  What is there to gain from controlling the universe outside of our atmosphere?  Should anyone even be able to own the territories or resources of outer space?  If so, how do we balance out competing interests?

Will Smith’s slapping of Chris Rock at the Oscars has brought public attention to the question of whether or not there are certain topics that should be off limits for comedians.  If so, where exactly should that line be drawn?  If a comedian crosses that line, what is the appropriate response to it?  Is Amy Schumer funny?  Some of these questions have more obvious answers than others.

Democracy is a Billion dollar industry.  Where does this money come from?  What exactly is it buying?  We look at the rules surrounding campaign contributions and question whether or not they strike an equal balance between protecting the legitimacy of our democratic system and the constitutionally protected right to free speech.  When all the cash is counted, does the average citizen have a realistic way to make a meaningful difference in our elections?

It’s hard to find a good definition of what Critical Race Theory is in the mainstream media.  We try to provide exactly that, as well as examine this concept’s strengths and weaknesses.  If and where it does have merit, should it be included as part of our school’s curriculums?  What sort of policy implications could this theory have for our society at large?

Josh and Kelly team up to propose the assassination of the Russian President in a formal debate.  The discussion explores how this targeted killing stacks up against other alternative solutions to the crisis in Ukraine.  Does Vladimir Putin deserve to die?  Would his death bring an end to the conflict? Or would backlash from his successor just make the situation worse for everyone involved?