Open to Debate Podcast Por Open to Debate arte de portada

Open to Debate

Open to Debate

De: Open to Debate
Escúchala gratis

America is more divided than ever—but it doesn’t have to be. Open to Debate offers an antidote to the chaos. We bring multiple perspectives together for real, nonpartisan debates. Debates that are structured, respectful, clever, provocative, and driven by the facts. Open to Debate is on a mission to restore balance to the public square through expert moderation, good-faith arguments, and reasoned analysis. We examine the issues of the day with the world’s most influential thinkers spanning science, technology, politics, culture, and global affairs. It’s time to build a stronger, more united democracy with the civil exchange of ideas. Be open-minded. Be curious. Be ready to listen. Join us in being Open to Debate. (Formerly Intelligence Squared U.S.)343f45f0-d52a-11f0-8aa9-e1c43713a701 Ciencias Sociales Política y Gobierno
Episodios
  • Is U.S. Control of Limited Territory in Greenland A Strategic Necessity?

    Is U.S. Control of Limited Territory in Greenland A Strategic Necessity?
    Feb 6 2026
    Greenland has become a geopolitical flashpoint. President Trump wants control of it, or at least sovereignty over some areas for military purposes, arguing that the United States gaining some territorial rights in Greenland is a necessity for U.S. security. But some leaders worry that a power grab could pit NATO against the U.S. and weaken an already fragile world order. Now we debate: Is U.S. Control of Limited Territory In Greenland a Strategic Necessity? Arguing Yes: Alexander B. Gray, Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council; Former Deputy Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff of the White House National Security Council Michael Pillsbury, Senior Advisor for the President’s Office at The Heritage Foundation Arguing No: Kori Schake, Senior Fellow and the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) Max Boot, Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations; Columnist at The Washington Post Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Join the conversation on Substack—share your perspective on this episode and subscribe to our weekly newsletter for curated insights from our debaters, moderators, and staff. Follow us on YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, Facebook, and TikTok to stay connected with our mission and ongoing debates. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Más Menos
    53 m
  • Legalize Assisted Suicide?

    Legalize Assisted Suicide?
    Jan 30 2026
    In December of 2025, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul announced that after months of negotiations with the state legislature, she was finally ready to sign into law a new bill allowing some patients to request medical assistance in dying, or MAID. That bill is currently sitting on her desk waiting for her signature. This type of bill has become more and more common. In 1994, Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act, becoming the first state to allows physician-assisted suicide for the terminally ill. Now 12 states plus the District of Columbia have laws on the books allowing physicians to assist patients in ending their life, within limits. Patients must have a prognosis of less than six months to live, and they must take the medication themselves. As more and more states discuss passing their own versions of these bills, we revisit the debate we had on this very topic in 2014. The motion that we debated: Legalize assisted suicide. While the preferred language has changed to Medical Aid in Dying, the thorny ethical questions and the complicated medical judgments remain unchanged. Will these laws lead to a slippery slope, where the vulnerable are pressured to choose death and human life is devalued? Or do we need to recognize everyone's basic right to autonomy, the right to end pain and suffering, and the right to choose to die with dignity? This debate was recorded live in November of 2014 at the Kaufman Music Center in New York. Arguing Yes: Peter Singer: Co-Founder of the Effective Altruism movement. Professor of Bioethics, Emeritus, Princeton University. Podcast host, "Lives Well Lived" Andrew Solomon: Author of “Far From the Tree”, Professor of Clinical Psychology at Columbia University and Weill Cornell Medical College. He also researches at Yale School of Medicine. Currently writing a book about suicide. Arguing No: Ilora Finlay, The Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: Former President of the British Medical Association, Member of the House of Lords. Daniel Sulmasy: André Hellgers Professor of Biomedical Ethics in the Departments of Medicine and Philosophy and Director of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown University. A few links to articles on the topic: New York to become latest state to allow aid in dying. What is it? ,USA Today Do Patients Without a Terminal Illness Have the Right to Die? New York Times The country gave its citizens the right to die. Doctors are struggling to keep up with demand. The Atlantic Magazine Join the conversation on ⁠Substack⁠—share your perspective on this episode and subscribe to our weekly newsletter for curated insights from our debaters, moderators, and staff. Follow us on ⁠YouTube⁠, ⁠Instagram⁠, ⁠LinkedIn⁠, ⁠X⁠, ⁠Facebook⁠, and ⁠TikTok⁠ to stay connected with our mission and ongoing debates. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Más Menos
    53 m
  • Innovation or Intrusion: The Big Data Debate

    Innovation or Intrusion: The Big Data Debate
    Jan 23 2026
    Every click, search, and online purchase feeds the data economy, driving AI, global business, and even political campaigns. But with risks growing in the private and public spheres, is Big Data advancing society or undermining its foundations? Supporters argue Big Data powers innovation by fueling breakthroughs in medicine, public health, and everyday efficiency. Yet critics warn that it erodes privacy, concentrates power, and threatens democracy. In the age of algorithms and analytics, is Big Data a necessary innovation or a dangerous intrusion? Arguing "Innovation": Kenneth Cukier, Deputy Executive Editor at The Economist Arguing "Intrusion": Carissa Véliz, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Philosophy and the Institute for Ethics in AI at the University of Oxford Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Join the conversation on our Substack—share your perspective on this episode and subscribe to our weekly newsletter for curated insights from our debaters, moderators, and staff. Follow us on YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, Facebook, and TikTok to stay connected with our mission and ongoing debates. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Más Menos
    53 m
Todavía no hay opiniones