A dozen University of Virginia students gathered Saturday in Hotel C on the West Range for the opening round of the inaugural Martin Skeptical Debate. Organized by the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society, the three-round tournament offers a $4,000 grand prize to student debaters willing to grapple with a topical scientific question: Will artificial intelligence significantly increase biological risk in the next five years?
The event is the result of seven years of planning, following the 2018 death of R. Bruce Martin, a former UVA chemistry professor who left funds in his will to promote debate on scientific skepticism at the University.
How did the debate come to be?
During Saturday’s qualifying round, fourth-year student Wyatt Dayhoff cross-examines opponent Liza Berlizova. Partners Berlizova and Jason Chin, both fourth-year computer engineering students, advanced to the semifinal round in January. (Photo by Renee Grutzik, University Communications)
Martin began teaching at UVA in 1959 and chaired the Department of Chemistry starting in 1968, transforming the department during a turbulent period.
“He really started the modern era in the chemistry department at UVA,” said Russell Grimes, a professor emeritus of chemistry and former colleague of Martin’s who retired in 2003 after 40 years at the University.
Martin’s colleagues remember him as an advocate for scientific rigor and intellectual honesty.
“He did not hesitate to tell you, to your face, that you were wrong about something,” Charles Grisham, a UVA professor emeritus of chemistry and Martin’s former colleague, said.
Colleagues say Martin was a devoted reader of “The Skeptical Inquirer,” a magazine promoting scientific inquiry and critical thinking. He even published three articles in the magazine, one of which is titled, “Coincidences: Remarkable or Random?”
Grisham remembers him as an “outspoken critic of everything that he referred to as pseudoscience.” At one point during his career, Martin hosted a lecture series debunking astrology and paranormal phenomena.
Grisham and Grimes were not surprised when they learned Martin had left a lump sum in his will to support debates on scientific skepticism.
“Of all the people I knew on our faculty, Bruce would have been the person to encourage a debate like that,” Grisham said.
Converting Martin’s will to reality required navigating legal and logistical challenges. Since the leadership team of the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society changes each school year, Jefferson Society alums have served as trustees, overseeing the process to ensure the event aligns with the former professor’s vision.
“There’s a lot of planning and legal matters that go into getting the money into the hands of some college students,” fourth-year student Ryan Rammacher, the president of the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society, said.
The choice of artificial intelligence and biological risk as this year’s topic reflects Martin’s interests in scientifically contested issues and contemporary concerns. Matthew Foley, a third-year student and the debate and oratory chair of the Jefferson Society, emphasized the importance of scientific debate today.
“A lot of the debates I see are very politically oriented or related to policy,” Foley said. “There’s not a lot of room for STEM debates on Grounds. I think it’s really special to have a debate that gets to include a segment of the University community that may not get the chance to do it otherwise.”
Saturday’s qualifying round
Fourteen teams of two competed in a single-elimination format throughout the day. Among the competitors were Lisa Berlizova and Jason Chin, fourth-year computer engineering students who had never participated in a collegiate debate before – and in Chin’s case, had never debated at all.
The pair met through a class project in the School of Engineering and Applied Science. They decided to team up due to their shared interest in the safe and responsible use of artificial intelligence, as well as their desire to challenge themselves with an experience that differed from what their engineering coursework typically offered.
“You have a lecture, but you don’t really get to discuss the consequences or the thoughts behind what you’re doing,” Berlizova said.
For Chin, the debate also provided something he felt was missing from his academic routine. “I think this is a great opportunity to get myself out of my shell,” he said.
.jpg)
