The Jefferson Society crowns winners of the first Martin Skeptical Debate

Student Experience

The Jefferson Society crowns winners of the first Martin Skeptical Debate

Two University of Virginia students argued artificial intelligence will significantly increase biological risk in the next five years and won $4,000 for making the most convincing case in the inaugural Martin Skeptical Debate – a new debate series that focuses on scientific skepticism, or the examination of scientifically contested issues through critical thinking and thorough research.

First-year law student Varnum Bayless and fourth-year College of Arts & Sciences student Christoph Schoer took home the prizes after three rounds of competition, organized by the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society.

Discovery and Innovation: NASA selects UVA researcher for asteroid mission

The tournament was made possible by the late R. Bruce Martin, a former UVA chemistry professor who left funds in his will to promote debate on scientific issues at the University.

Saturday’s final round, held in the auditorium of Old Cabell Hall, pitted Bayless and Schoer against fourth-year computer engineering students Lisa Berlizova and Jason Chin, who argued the negative side of the proposition.

“We had only argued the negative case before, so we had done a lot of prep on it,” Schoer said. “We had some really fun arguments that we wanted to bring for the negative, if we had gotten it.”

Portrait of UVA Law student Varnum Bayless (left) with Christoph Schoer (right), posing together.

First-year law student Varnum Bayless, left, and fourth-year College student Christoph Schoer pose together after competing in the final round of the Martin Skeptical Debate. The duo, who met in the Washington Society, partnered for the competition. (Photo by Sophie Curtis, Jefferson Literary and Debating Society)

Bayless and Schoer, who met through the Washington Society debating organization, reviewed their affirmative argument Saturday morning, focusing on how AI could enable agroterrorism, cybersecurity threats and medical misinformation.

Berlizova and Chin countered by highlighting biological advancements accelerated by AI, including the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, which they cited as an example of AI decreasing, rather than increasing, biological risk.

The runner-up teammates, who met in a class in the School of Engineering, brought fresh perspectives to the competition. Neither had debated in college before, though Berlizova had some high school debate experience. They decided to team up after the AI-focused resolution caught their attention.

“The topic was just so interesting to me,” Chin said. “I feel like this was a great opportunity to get myself out of my shell and force myself into situations like this.”

The Jefferson Society tapped three professionals from Northern Virginia and Washington, D.C., to judge the debate: Daniel Remler, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security; Adeline Williams, a biological scientist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization; and Kelly Seagraves, the vice president for National Security and International Affairs at the Biotechnology Innovation Organization.

Wide view of a formal debate with four participants seated at two tables and a podium between them, with an audience below a large mural.

Finalist teams strategize their rebuttals before the final round of the Martin Skeptical Debate, held Saturday in Old Cabell Hall. (Photo by Renee Grutzik, University Communications)

Remler delivered a keynote speech before the debate began.

“The resolution before us is genuinely difficult, and I want to applaud the Jefferson Society for making such a thorny and tricky issue for us to ponder tonight,” he said. “That smart, informed people can argue it both ways is not a deficiency to be solved; it’s how a free society navigates uncertainty.”

The judges evaluated teams on consistency of logic, strong understanding and command of evidence and overall oratorical skills.

“It definitely felt good (to win),” Bayless said. “It’s very exciting to see the hard work we put in pay off.”