posted 11th May 2026
Most motions are either / or. Either we have a wealth tax, or we don’t. Either we give 11 year olds the vote, or we don’t. While the verdict of the judge as to which side was more persuasive and won the debate may be extremely close, and come down to 51/ 49 (or even a draw), both sides will be arguing in a binary, zero-sum way - we should do either all of or none of what is in the motion.
There is an exception: the sub-genre known as comparative motions. These invite you to debate which of two options is better / more likely.
This sub-genre breaks down into further sub-sub-genres:
Fun topics for the end of term
This house prefers cats to dogs.
This house prefers Halloween to Christmas.
Lifestyle topics
This house would rather live in the city than the country.
This house would rather be an only child.
Philosophical topics
This house would rather be good than clever.
This house would rather be a happy cat than an unhappy genius.
Social topics
This house believes that AI will make our lives better.
This house believes we will live better lives than our parents.
Here are some tips for success with comparative motions.
1. Settle for sixty
Unlike with a zero-sum motion, you do not need to negate all the arguments on the other side. You can accept that living in the country brings many benefits, that there are advantages to being clever, that AI will bring benefits; you just need to prove that there are more benefits to living in the city, more advantages to being good, more harms than benefits from AI. If you aim for 100%, denying any benefits at all on their side, you will waste a lot of time and look ridiculous; but if you can convince the judge that your side is 60% to their 40%, you have won.
2. Turn advantages to disadvantages
Settling for sixty doesn’t mean you can’t, or shouldn’t, rebut the other side’s arguments where you can. You can do those most effectively by turning what look like advantages into disadvantages. Your opponents say living in the country provides you with a more close-knit community than the loneliness of city life; you point out that when things go wrong in a village, they really go wrong, and there is nowhere to get away from people you have fallen out with (just listen to a few episodes of The Archers …). Your opponents say clever people can create inventions which benefit humanity; you point out that nuclear weapons were created by clever people, and that they might end up destroying humanity. Your opponents say that self-driving cars will make cities safer; you point out that they will also put hundreds of thousands of lorry, bus, delivery and taxi drivers out of work.
3. Balance micro and macro
One problem with comparative motions is that they often deal with very big subjects. Getting hold of them can be like nailing jelly to the wall. If you’re arguing for the introduction of a wealth tax, you only have to make the case for one specific measure; but how to get a grip on the multiple ramifications of AI?
The answer is to balance the micro and the macro, constantly oscillating between the two. Start with specific examples people can get hold of, and then step back and put the example in the context of one of the big ideas the motion is really about.
For example. If you are arguing against This house believes AI will make our lives better, you start by pointing out how students can now use Chat GPT to produce a long and complex essay without having to think about or understand what they are writing about at all. Then step back and talk about the big issues around education: it is about producing fully formed humans who can think and understand for themselves. Once we can outsource thinking and understanding to machines, we become less human. Or, if you are arguing for This house would rather live in the city than the country, you start by setting the wonderful variety of food from around the world available in a big city against the boredom of one pub with a stodgy menu in a village; then step back and talk about how it is inherently more worthwhile to live in a way which constantly brings you up against variety, difference and novelty.
Comparative motions bring their own challenges, but they often spark the most interesting debates, and will keep anyone who takes part in or listens to them thinking long after the debate is over.
