Elizabeth Arce
Feature Story
October 18, 2015
Monday
665
An Argument for Debate
Philip Leyerle casually leaned back in his swivel chair as he reminisced about the time he won the Harvard International Forensics Tournament four years ago. At 6 feet 6 inches tall, Leyerle may not seem like the kind of guy who spent his time in high school researching debate topics. His stature is more in line with a basketball star. In fact, basketball was Leyerle’s activity of choice before a collision left him with a broken ankle. Leyerle’s recollections of the collision are not filled with self-pity. He says he quickly chose a new activity instead of sulking.
Leyerle said his main reason for choosing debate was because of his family history. His greatgrandma coached his grandma to win a state title. “I felt like debate was in my blood,” Leyerle said.
Leyerle said he and his partner prepared heavily for each debate tournament. He explained the process: topics are released a month before the tournament, and had educational merit and could be argued from either opposing or supporting sides. Leyerle debated on a wide variety of topics from the privatization of space exploration to whether it is morally permissible to kill your abuser.
Leyerle said an important part of debating is being well-versed in topic literature. His partner and he would spend the first week reading as much as they could about the topic. They discussed both sides of the argument in the second week. They discussed strategy in the third week, and they researched the arguments they wanted to make in the fourth and final week, he said. Even though each pair on the team had different topics, the team strived to work together. “Everyone was willing to help if you had a question or if they found something that was of use to you,” Leyerle said.

Leyerle’s topic for the Harvard competition was about WikiLeaks. When asked about his attitude going into debate competitions, Leyerle referenced his past life as a basketball player. “I took a sports-minded approach to debate. Some of the teams my basketball team played looked intimidating.
It got to the point where we would lose games before they even started because of our attitude. As a result, I tried to keep a clear, level head in debate,” Leyerle said.
When Leyerle and Soules realized they made it to the final round he says they were not fazed.
They were, however, annoyed that their opponents’ coach snuck into their previous debate and took notes over their arguments. The opposing team was from a Jersey prep school, but Leyerle was unimpressed.
“When we walked in the room there was an immediate perceptible air of arrogance … they were confident they could beat us,” Leyerle said with a smirk on his face.
When Leyerle and Soules won the tournament, he says relief washed over them. Leyerle said they were relieved because they had not been beat by unethical people, referring back to how his opponents’ coach watched a previous round to give his students an unfair advantage.
Although Leyerle did not continue debate in college, he continues to be thankful for everything he learned.
“Because of debate, I have confidence to communicate in front of other people. I know how to be persuasive and firm. I’ve learned how to research efficiently and effectively,” Leyerle said.
Debate certainly helped Leyerle in his classes at Baylor, but more importantly it also helped him become confident in his beliefs.
“Debate was good for me, because it strengthened my own personal beliefs. Thorough research on topics like abortion helped me to have research-backed evidence whenever people question my anti-

abortion views. Debate also taught me how to criticize beliefs without attacking the person,” Leyerle said.
Leyerle says he wishes more people had exposure to debate because he feels it would lead to less angry Facebook monologues and more thought provoking arguments.
“Imagine a world where people did the research before blasting their opinions,” Leyerle said.