Of course, too few of those technological achievements that are translated from scientific knowledge are purely capable of only evil. The vast majority can either benefit society or jeopardize it by harming people. That's why "double-edged sword" is the most accurate metaphor for them.
The use of scientific inventions for world domination is an example of a "double-edged sword". One of the earliest depictions of a scientific madman was Verne. In "The Master of the World," he depicted Robiel, a madman who was invisible in a crater. He invented the amphibious vehicle as a means of domination. Verne, however, was a loyal elder, and could never get the bad guys right. The image of the "world's master, Robiel" is also very funny.
In Wells's The Invisible Man, Griffin goes on a rampage and calls himself "The Invisible Man". However, he didn't even get to rule a remote English village before the villagers rounded him up and killed him as a monster.
In The Great Dictator, the Soviet writer Belyaev portrayed a typical scientific maniac. German psychologist Stirner, who had long studied the transmission of information between animals, finally invented a device to directly control the minds of others with brain waves. He leaves the scientific world and mixes with the financier Gottlieb, controlling first Gottlieb and his main assistants, then business rivals, and even being able to create stock market turmoil for his profit. Finally, when Steiner's plot was uncovered, he actually used this weapon against the armies of several countries, sending the attacking armies scattering in disbelief. It was only when attacked by their Soviet counterparts with an equivalent weapon that Steiner's plot failed. Soviet scientists, on the other hand, have transformed the apparatus for controlling the minds of others into a tool for the benefit of mankind: it greatly speeds up the transfer of information between individual human beings, coordinates collective labor, and can even make an orchestra free of a conductor.
Nan Yuan Zhao once said that disasters and catastrophes created by moral and religious maniacs have occurred throughout history and abound in reality. Science maniacs, on the other hand, appear only in Hollywood sci-fi horror movies. So, in the late modern period, the people who use science for evil in the writings of science fiction writers are no longer the maniacs who move about trying to control the world. These evildoers want to achieve some more specific, less far-reaching, but more realistic goals with the new technology at hand.
Robin Kirk is best known for his "medical horror" novels. The Death Hormone is one of his science fiction medical horror novels. Death Hormone is a hormone inherent in the human body, secreted by the pituitary gland like growth hormone, but only appears after the secretion of sex hormones stops. Medical scientist Hayes was inspired by Pacific salmon, which die immediately after spawning. Hayes eventually extracted the death hormone trigger from the salmon's head. Injected into the organism, it causes an immediate and massive release of the death hormone.
Hayes works for a large membership health center. A number of successful, middle-aged men join this health center in order to receive lifelong health treatments. However, over a period of time, there are always some middle-aged people who die suddenly. All of them had bad habits of smoking and drinking, but their experience before entering the health center showed that they were still in normal physical condition. At the time of their deaths, they were all extremely cardiovascularly aged. This list of deaths eventually included Hayes himself. These apparently normal deaths aroused the suspicion of Dr. Jetson. After repeated investigations, he finally discovered that it was Shirley and others at the health center who were secretly administering Hayes' extracted death hormone inducer to these people to make them die sooner, so that they would not be forced to provide free medication in large quantities when these people aged.
At the end of the novel, several book characters directly discuss the good and evil of science and technology on the issue of death hormone, and whether to set up laws to restrain the scientists, so that they can't invent as they wish. This shows that the author was conscious of the good and evil issues of science when he created the book.
The skyscraper was born in the United States at the end of the nineteenth century and soon became a symbol of the combination of technology and wealth. In the second half of the twentieth century, many countries and regions in East Asia joined the skyscraper race, high-rise buildings erected at a rate of "spring" to describe it, I'm afraid it's not too much. The high cost burden and disaster potential brought by skyscrapers have also become the focus of attention. The novel "Skyscraper Fire" is based on this theme.
When the novel came out, the world's tallest building was the Sears Tower in Chicago. The author fictionalized the new world's tallest building, which was located across the street from the Sears Tower, so that at the end of the novel, the rescue team was able to set up a steel cable between the Sears Tower and the "world's tallest building" to save people. The owner of the World's First Building cuts corners in order to meet the deadline, resulting in overloaded electrical circuits and a dark fire on the day of the opening ceremony. The characteristic "chimney effect" of the skyscraper caused the fire to spread upward, floor by floor, to the top floor. There, hundreds of dignitaries were celebrating. Due to the lack of security and other reasons, by the time the fire was discovered, it was impossible to put it out.
The work's concerns about fire hazards in skyscrapers came through the mouth of the fire chief. After the fire, the fire chief came to the scene, met the architect and questioned the latter, saying, "Why do you build such a high building when you know that the current fire-fighting technology can't do anything about fires above seven floors? And at the end, he said something even more horrible: Today is not bad, only 200 people died. In the future, similar fires will kill thousands of people. Only then will you know what kind of buildings you should build! The movie was filmed in the 1980s, and more than a decade later, this horrific prophecy fell on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, where the Pentagon suffered far fewer casualties than the World Trade Center in the 9/11 attacks. If it weren't for the high-rise buildings, the 9/11 attacks could have been a magnified Lockerbie.
The novel was later adapted into an influential movie with a large cast. Only the novel ended with many people, including the governor, not escaping the fire. The movie, on the other hand, added a brighter ending: rescuers blew up a water tank on the roof of the building and doused the blaze. But that wasn't reality. Water from a rooftop water tower is really a drop in the bucket for a roaring fire like the one on 9/11.
In 1972, mankind crossed the threshold of genetically modified technology at Stanford University. It unleashed an almost limitless possibility: mixing genes from different species according to human needs to create new species not found in nature. As soon as gene technology came out, it was immediately applied to agricultural technology, creating a large number of new species. While they have provided high yielding crops, they have also created a major storm of acceptance and resistance against GM crops. A not-so-distant fiasco in Wuhan, where farmers destroyed a GM experimental field, shows that this wave of resistance has now blown into the country. The short sci-fi book "Acting on behalf of Heaven" is based on GM crops.
In this novel, the American MSD Biological Company invested two billion dollars to develop the "Magic King strain" of wheat. It is high-yielding, disease-resistant and of excellent quality. In order to prevent farmers from keeping the harvested wheat seeds, MSD mixed in the genes of the Magic Wheat with a toxic protein gene that causes infertility. This way, any second-generation wheat seeds will not be able to grow without a special solvent that the company has secretly mastered to inhibit the toxic protein gene. As a means of protecting its intellectual property, this was no excuse, and a low-level MSD employee was responsible for marketing it to the Shaanxi region of China. The first year's harvest was so good that the next year, some farmers secretly kept it in their fields, resulting in the loss of a large portion of their wheat fields. Although MSD had done a lot of preventive research, the suicide gene spread to other wheat varieties due to the transportation function of some special viruses. The black death wheat spread plague-like.
An interesting example of "bad science" about grain is Grain of Life. Belyaev's scientist, Broyles, is not only harmless, he doesn't even have a business agenda like MSD. He cultivates a single-celled organism that can obtain nutrients directly from the air, expand itself, and can be eaten directly, becoming the "grain of immortality". However, instead of solving the problem of hunger, this "grain of immortality" led to the bankruptcy of farmers and aggravated the economic crisis. In the end, when summer came, the temperature was favorable and the "eternal grain" grew rapidly, covering one piece of land after another and becoming a man-made disaster.
Since the emergence of Internet technology in the 1970s, it has been spreading around the world in an explosive manner. Among the people I know, none of those who have been on the Internet would choose never to touch it again. It has become a way of working and a way of life for many people. But the internet has also made many people addicted and its captive. Today, the problem of Internet addiction has become a new educational issue. According to the author's observation, there have been a large number of Internet addicts among adults, only that they are independent and responsible, unlike teenagers who have guardians to reflect the problem to public opinion.
In the short sci-fi novel "The Lotus-colored Dandelion," Xinghe describes a future world where Internet addiction is common. In this era, not too far from the present, Internet addiction is already a serious social problem, even requiring mandatory withdrawal. As with today's drug rehabs, there are prisons for internet addiction within the justice system. The novel is a frightening portrayal of the reactions to Internet addiction: the inversion of day and night, the inability to practise one's profession, the difficulty of communicating with others, the obsessive search for Internet access everywhere, and even the use of prison riots to rebel against mandatory abstinence. What's more, because the author uses the first person to tell the story from the point of view of an Internet addict, the dangers of Internet addiction are extremely well represented. The severe physical reactions depicted in the novel are more or less already present in some Internet addicts today.
The author also envisions concrete measures for a future society to force Internet addiction to be broken: first of all, the addicts should be basically taken off the Internet, which is mandatory and backed by law. Of course, in order to keep them from having a mental breakdown, there would be limited access to the Internet under surveillance. Then the addicts are forced to participate in heavy exercise activities. The physical condition of a person who sits in front of a computer for years is quite deteriorated. In addition, the addict is forced to read books printed on paper to gradually get rid of their dependence on the computer.
In 1928, a serendipitous phenomenon in a laboratory, coupled with the prepared mind of Fleming, a British medical scientist, helped mankind enter the age of antibiotics. Today, antibiotics have become the usual weapon of choice for doctors. However, the misuse of antibiotics has led to an increase in bacterial resistance and the formation of new medical problems. The full-length sci-fi "Life and Death Balance" depicts this topic. Although the author, Wang Jinkang, has long been well known in the sci-fi community, it is largely because of this novel that he has come to the attention of the public outside the sci-fi community, as it deals with a thorny issue at the forefront of today's science and technology.
The novel is set in the Middle East and depicts the story of a certain military megalomaniac who unleashes bacterial warfare on a neighboring country. A parallel thread is the Huangfu family's research into "balanced medicine". As a fictional element in the novel, balanced medicine itself is not important, but the author uses this element to tell the story of his concern about the misuse of antibiotics. Through the mouth of Huangfu Yushan, a medical fanatic, the author writes: "Drug-resistant strains of bacteria are developing like a flood, and even common germs such as E. coli and dysentery bacilli have drug-resistant strains, which are not helped by antibiotics. Penicillin dosages for sepsis have been increased from tens of thousands of units to tens of millions of units, but the mortality rate is still back to the level it was before antibiotics were introduced." Science Fiction World 97, 5, 15.
The author even fictionalized a case of a patient with renal failure disorder. This was a high-ranking family member. It was because of her position and ability to use new, good drugs in large quantities that she fell into the trap of antibiotic abuse over a period of twenty years. The author uses a long medical record to describe how she was "sick and sick" step by step, and was eventually surrounded by drugs to a horrible end.
■Positive: When mankind for science and technology at the same time, please do not forget that science and technology can also be the same to the evil heart with the power of the devil
Humanity will be ruined by science and technology, but also based on modern science and technology on the development of human beings all-around the distortion, which is concentrated in the social relations, the spiritual realm and the ethical and moral level
■Opposite: Science and technology is the most solid shield to protect human beings, we believe that science and technology is the most important factor to protect human beings, we will be the most important thing to protect human beings. We believe that the continuous improvement of science and technology will bring mankind into a more beautiful and mysterious realm
Mankind will not be ruined by science and technology, because the course of development of science and technology has proved that the devil is one foot taller than the road, and the problems brought by science and technology to mankind can be solved by the further advancement of science and technology itself
Wu Tien (the positive side of the first defense): First of all, everything has its positive and negative sides. Positive and negative sides, the benefits of science and technology do not need me to spend more words, later the other side of the defense must be spilling, however, often we think of it to be downplayed or even ignored is its negative impact. Unlike other things, the opposite side of technology is as sharp as a blade and as sharp as a sword, which is what we often call a double-edged sword. However, if you think that mankind has been awake to realize the existence of double-edged sword, then you are a bit too naive, when mankind time and time again proudly said that the new science and technology is the fastest possible to apply, and show how efficient we are human beings, you have ever thought, this also means that the negative effects of science and technology too late to understand, or do not want to understand, it is the beginning of the disaster, the destructive nature of science and technology is the embodiment of The destructive effects of technology are an example of the irreversibility of this trend.
Second, the uncertainty of modern technological development has turned technology into a double-edged sword, the sword of Damocles. Humanity's use of science and technology has long reached the point of impatience, the accumulation of years and years, making the negative effects of science and technology is at any time in the global outbreak, which is the deeper crisis of the destructive trend of science and technology.
Third, the high degree of dependence on science and technology makes the sword of Damocles ready to move. Humans have a high degree of trust in science and technology and subjective dependence on the sword can be arbitrary power, one touch, this third trend leads directly to the technology is the power to destroy mankind, when mankind for the science and technology at the same time, please do not forget, science and technology can also be the same to the evil heart with the devilish power.
Zheng Wei (first defense): First of all, we would like to point out that the negative effects of technology can not be blamed on technology, on the contrary, it is precisely the human failure to scientifically understand the world as a whole, as well as irrational use of science and technology caused by the evil consequences.
Secondly, the other side overestimates the difficulties that science and technology have brought to mankind, but underestimates mankind's ability to solve these difficulties. The fact that we can't solve the problems of science and technology doesn't mean that we can't solve them in the future. We believe that mankind will not be ruined by science and technology, because the course of scientific and technological development has proved that the devil is one foot taller, the road is ten feet taller, and the difficulties brought by science and technology to mankind can be solved by the further development of science and technology itself. 70's scientists used to predict that mankind will face an energy crisis in the beginning of the 21st century due to the over-consumption of natural resources by the products of science and technology, and now, the development of energy and the development of micro-solar energy, which makes this panic disappears. have wiped out this fear.
Thirdly, with science and technology in the hands of human beings, human beings can create a scientific precautionary system by means of ethical and legal norms, so that the negative impacts of individual technological inventions can be restrained throughout the system.
Jane Anjun (second defense): The other side says that human beings have ethics and laws, but can ethics and laws control science and technology? Scientists are replicating human beings on the high seas, but moral laws can't control them. We believe that mankind will be destroyed by science and technology, but also based on the fact that modern science and technology have distorted the development of mankind in all aspects, which is centered on the three levels of social relations, spirituality, and ethics and morality. First of all, the development trend of science and technology has the potential power to destroy the social life of human beings. Secondly, the destructive power of science and technology is also manifested in its constant impact on and destruction of human life, which is centrally manifested in the two new favorites of human science and technology, the Internet and genetic technology. The warriors of the Internet have long declared that they want to turn the network into a kind of life. However, when the virtual replaces the real, the existence of human beings as a society also disappears, as the saying goes, if the skin does not exist, the hair will not be attached to it? Look at genetic technology, life science and technology to treat diseases, but on the other hand is interfering with nature, to create more perfect human beings, but genetically modified perfect human beings are human beings or high-tech products? Today's genetic technology on the human inner nature of the change more direct impact on the last line of defense of the human spiritual home - ethics and morality, science and technology on the full range of distortion of human society, is destroying the foundation of our society and the spiritual world.
Zhang Wenbo (the second defense): Just now the other side greatly exaggerated the negative impact of science and technology on human beings, although we can't completely exclude the possibility that high-tech will bring negative impact on human beings, but any scientific and technological achievements may have both advantages and disadvantages, and the impact is not equal to the destruction.
First of all, technology is the driving force behind human progress.
Secondly, if there is no science and technology, human beings would have died out long ago. Science and technology is the strongest shield to protect mankind, we believe that the continuous improvement of science and technology will bring mankind into a more beautiful and mysterious realm, so we believe that mankind will not be destroyed by science and technology.
Fu Xin (third defense): Just now the other side made two mistakes: First, the other side really talked about the benefits of science and technology, but the benefits of science and technology, we do not deny ah, just the other side of the defense you really think that the water can carry the boat, the water must not be able to overthrow the boat? Secondly, the other side said that human beings are rational, but rationality does not mean that they will not perish, and I will argue our proposition from the trend of the development of modern science and technology.
First, the development of science and technology is moving from individual trend to national and social trend. The individual's pursuit of and dependence on technological life is not a big problem, but the problem is that this pursuit and dependence is turning into a national and social trend in the form of a unique value, and science and technology have turned into the only right direction in the world, and all the ideas that go against it have to make way for it.
Secondly, the destructive trend of science and technology is highlighted by the fact that science and technology have been deified while nature has been instrumentalized. It is science and technology that makes human beings no longer feel that they are a part of nature, and it is science and technology that makes human beings feel that they have a new God in their hands while they continue to instrumentalize nature. However, when the natural order is broken, may I ask where mankind will stand?
Jixing (the third defense): Just now the other side of the defense to blame all the mistakes on science and technology, is one-sided, is not a true understanding of the relationship between science and technology and human beings, science and technology is not water, human beings can control science and technology. The development of anything has its negative side.
In the following, I will start from a realistic point of view to explain our point of view. First, the development of new and high technology so that human beings have been unexpected gains, China News Network news, robots for the first time in China to assist in minimally invasive surgery; Nature magazine reported that the cell size of a nano-cow was finally born. These kinds of achievements brought to us by science and technology have pushed mankind to a more prosperous starting point.
Second, with the current high-tech to solve our existing problems, there is no doubt that many problems will be solved with the continuous development of science and technology, as small as garbage is no longer polluting the environment, as large as the energy crisis is no longer worrying.
Third, the level of scientific and technological development of mankind in a number of years, I believe that all of us here can not imagine, like the Stone Age is drilling wood to get fire, they can not possibly imagine, now our world has a gas and electricity. Mankind will not be ruined by technology, on the contrary science will only make mankind more and more advanced.
Crossfire
■Positive side: look at today's genetic technology, has been in the impact of ethics and morality of the last line of defense of the spiritual home of mankind, what do you do?
■Opposite side: human beings can control science and technology, human beings will not be destroyed by science and technology
Chen Xiaohuan: May I ask the other side of the debate, today talk about "will" is not to talk about the trend?
Wang Qingmei: Of course we are talking about the trend, and the trend we are talking about is based on the history and reality, to find our basis to talk about the future.
Jane Anjun: Thank you for agreeing with our point of view, talking about the future of course, we have to look at the trend, based on the reality, the trend of judgment, the destructive trend of science and technology, the other side of the defense how to not see.
Jixing: But the other side of the defense is to ignore the history, we have to prove that technology will not destroy mankind from the aspect of history.
Fu Xin: Is that called a trend? The other side is called looking at history and fantasizing about the future.
Zheng Wei: the other side of the defense, our side at least still put our inference based on history, while the other side of the defense to make speculation, no wonder the other side of the other side of the defense with this unscientific method to arrive at this unscientific conclusions.
Wu Tian: Our side is obviously based on reality to see the trend, why can't the other apologists see it? May I ask today's technology are independently developed, this is still not a trend of destruction?
Wang Qingmei: I would like to ask the other apologist, you want to do stock market assessment, can you not look at the past historical data?
Chen Xiaohuan: The other side of the debate, today we are constantly told how good technology is, but is it not possible for good and bad to coexist? Can't good and bad coexist and destroy?
Zheng Wei: We don't deny that the good and the bad can co-exist, but what we believe is that human beings can control technology, and human beings won't be destroyed by technology.
Jian Anjun: If the other side really thinks that human beings can control technology, please tell us clearly how.
Wang Qingmei: The other side has been listing the various negative effects brought by science and technology to people, and has been still talking about the dangers of gene technology, completely ignoring the great contribution made by gene technology to human beings, if gene technology is useless, then why did the National Institute of Education in Singapore spend ten years to develop the world's first light-emitting "Hooch Flower"? Please provide an explanation.
Chen Xiaohuan: We are not denying the benefits of technology ah, but I hug you at the same time, I can not stab you? Is there a contradiction between me hugging you and me stabbing you?
Zheng Wei: So far, the other side has been avoiding our question, if mankind will be destroyed by technology, does the other side think that the Singaporean government's five-year plan on science and technology is accelerating this destruction?
Jian Anjun: There is no contradiction between the implementation of the science program and the fact that mankind will be destroyed by science and technology, we are standing here today, we are trying to understand the trend, the other side of the debate has not yet seen the trend, so why should we talk about the trend after the problem?
Wang Qingmei: The other side's opinion is that since technology is useless, should we stop developing it?
Fu Xin: the logic of the other side of the debate is really strange, on the one hand, he has not realized the existence of the problem, and on the other hand, he is asking me how to solve the problem, and can not walk before wanting to run, it is really strange ah.
Zheng Wei: we think the other side of the defense is even more strange, on the one hand, on the one hand, said that mankind will be destroyed by science and technology, on the other hand, but do not give up on science and technology, want to continue to develop science and technology, this is not a contradiction, is not it?
Wu Tian: It's not that we're contradicting ourselves, it's because people have to bow down under the trend, look at today's genetic technology, it's already impacting ethics and morality, which is the last line of defense of the spiritual home of mankind, what do you do?
Wang Qingmei: I would like to ask the other side, with scientific literacy of the four debaters, since the technology will destroy mankind, then why do we still have to study so hard to learn about science and technology?
Summary
■Positive side: technology brings convenience to mankind and at the same time sows the seeds of destruction
■Opposite side: we have to pursue the truth, but we must not take individual phenomena as universal, and it is also not possible to look at the world through the eye of a needle
WANG QINGMEI (Opposite side of the four debaters): I would like to point out that the other side of the debaters have made three serious mistakes: first, to point First, to generalize by point. The negative effects of science and technology have been emphasized one-sidedly and exaggerated infinitely.
Secondly, the second mistake is to take the words out of context, asserting that science and technology will destroy mankind because there are some problems in the development of science and technology, and completely ignoring the role of humanism and ethics in restraining and guiding science and technology.
Thirdly, the other side is looking at things from a stagnant point of view, only pointing out the existing problems of science and technology, while our side is pointing out the innovative nature of science and technology from a developmental point of view, and modern science and technology bring us ever-changing and newer and faster solutions to problems.
The following is a summary of our point of view: First, human beings are rational, otherwise there would not be the birth of science and technology, we have to pursue the truth, but we must not take individual phenomena as a general, and it is impossible to see the world from the eye of a needle.
Secondly, science and technology are controllable, and on this point, our side has cited a large number of facts. What we want to emphasize here is that the problems that currently exist can be made completely controllable through human self-discipline and the development of science and technology, and that under the double insurance of human rationality and the development of science and technology, mankind will not be ruined by science and technology.
Chen Xiaohuan (the fourth defense): First of all, the other side tells us how good the future technology is, but the word "will" in today's topic is telling us to look at tomorrow from today's perspective, not from tomorrow's perspective.
Then the other side told us from the historical point of view, technology has a lot of benefits, we do not deny it, but technology has a lot of benefits can not cover up the bad side of it, the focus of today's debate is the bad side of technology is, will or will not destroy human beings, the other side of the debate again and again, the king of the right and left, the thesis bias is the other side of the debate on the topic is the second big mistake made by the other side of the debate.
Then the other side naively told us that the development of science and technology can be controlled by human beings, but what we see is that science and technology is determining the strength and status of politics, economy and even a country, and it has long been overriding all the morality and law and rationality and conscience, so what else can be done to control it?
Summarizing our point of view, first of all, science and technology in bringing convenience to mankind at the same time also sowed the seeds of destruction, now what people dare to speak of science and technology is people-oriented, is it for the service of people is called people-oriented? Second, science and technology is deified, but people are instrumentalized, everything to science and technology first, such instances in the world around us abound ah, science and technology is only a tool, but when it is deified, but when people are instrumentalized, such a human being itself is a kind of destruction. Third, science and technology is dominating the destiny of mankind with unprecedented power, the independence of scientific and technological development has long exceeded the control of mankind, and in turn dominate mankind, science and technology is only a means to an end, rather than the end, we only have the courage to recognize the existence of this destructive trend, then we can then say to everyone, the road is long, I will be up and down and seek the truth.
Judges' scores
Zhou Duanchang (judge's representative):
In terms of the tacit understanding of the whole team, we feel that both teams have very good and very strong rebuttal ability, which should be pointed out that the positive side of the free debate in the ability to play more evenly, that is to say, almost every debaters have the ability to get up at any time to refute the other side of the argument. This game, I personally feel that the pace is really fast, but because of the fast pace, the beginning of the actually difficult to distinguish between winners and losers, it can be said that to the second and even to the third representative of the speech, or winners and losers are difficult to distinguish. It was only after the fourth speaker and the free debate, especially after the fourth speaker had debated successively, that we felt that the situation was clearer. In terms of individual performance, it is worth mentioning the fourth delegate from the positive side, who, in my opinion, was very humane in his debates, although sometimes his arguments were a bit too forceful, although in the form of free debates, they are sometimes unjustifiable. Judge's verdict: the positive side wins.
The 2001 International Tertiary Debate was concluded in Singapore earlier this month, and CCTV will broadcast live footage of all seven debates during the National Day. Compared with the purely philosophical debates of the previous editions, the topics of the competition were closer to the realities of social life.
The International Tertiary Debate is held every two years and is jointly organized by CCTV and MediaCorp Singapore. This time it was held in the Lion City, with the clear objective of popularizing and promoting the Chinese language. Not only did the participating universities include Wuhan University, Soochow University and the University of Hong Kong, as well as the National University of Singapore and the University of Malaya, but also the University of Sydney and the University of Windsor of Canada, which were the first to participate in the event, as well as the prestigious University of Oxford of the United Kingdom, which was the first to participate in the event. Among the four debaters were two British gentlemen and a blonde lady.
Wuhan University's debate team and the University of Malaya made it to the finals, with the University of Malaya winning the championship and Wuhan University finishing second, and the third debater, Yu Lei, being named the best debater. The newspaper is authorized to publish the debate from today.