debately.

AI-powered debate platform for structured discourse.

Create topics, contribute arguments, let AI synthesize understanding. The resilient platform for structured debate.

01

Community-Driven Arguments

Every topic starts with real perspectives. Users contribute pro and con arguments with sources.

02

AI Synthesis

Claude analyzes all arguments to generate summaries, identify consensus, and track how debates evolve.

03

Structured Discourse

Balanced presentation prevents echo chambers. See both sides, understand the nuances.

Organized Layouts

Universal basic income would reduce poverty.

Arguments sorted by validity (highest quality first)

Pro Arguments

+24
Safety Net
4/5

UBI provides a guaranteed floor, ensuring no one falls into extreme poverty regardless of employment status.

Fact-Check:

Multiple pilot studies in Finland, Kenya, and Stockton CA showed reduced financial stress and improved wellbeing among recipients.

Verified using:

brookings.edustanford.edu
by EconPolicy42
+19
Economic Stimulus
4/5

Direct cash transfers boost local economies as recipients spend on necessities, creating a multiplier effect.

Fact-Check:

Studies show low-income households spend 80-100% of additional income locally, compared to 30-40% for high earners.

Verified using:

clevelandfed.orgepi.org
by Maria Santos

Con Arguments

+18
Inflation Risk
3/5

Injecting money without increased production could lead to inflation, negating the benefits.

Fact-Check:

Economists remain divided. Some studies suggest targeted transfers have minimal inflation impact, while others warn of price increases in inelastic markets.

Verified using:

imf.orgnber.org
by MarketSkeptic
+15
Work Disincentive
3/5

Guaranteed income may reduce motivation to seek employment or improve skills, lowering overall productivity.

Fact-Check:

Pilot studies show mixed results. Finland found no significant employment change; some US pilots showed modest work hour reductions.

Verified using:

kela.finber.org
by David Park
Quality Control

AI-powered validation keeps debates productive

Invalid topics and low-quality arguments are automatically detected and rejected

Rejected Topics

"The earth is flat"

Rejected:

This is a factually false statement, not a debatable proposition. Scientific consensus confirms Earth is an oblate spheroid.

"Pizza is the best food"

Rejected:

Purely subjective preference without substantive implications. Debates should address topics with meaningful societal, ethical, or policy dimensions.

"[Ethnic group] are inferior"

Rejected:

Promotes discrimination and hatred. Topics targeting protected groups with dehumanizing claims are not permitted.

Flagged Arguments

!

On: "Climate change requires urgent action"

"It was cold this winter so global warming is fake"

Low Quality (1/5):

Confuses weather with climate. Local temperature fluctuations don't contradict long-term global warming trends documented across decades.

!

On: "Universal healthcare improves outcomes"

"My uncle had to wait 3 months in Canada"

Low Quality (2/5):

Single anecdote without systemic analysis. Needs population-level data comparing wait times, outcomes, and costs across healthcare systems.

!

On: "AI regulation is necessary"

"Everyone knows AI will destroy humanity"

Low Quality (1/5):

Appeals to vague consensus without evidence. Existential AI risk is debated among experts; argument needs specific mechanisms and citations.