Ethics Bowl for an Uncivil World

The world is too much with us late and soon…

—William Wordsworth

When Wordsworth wrote these words, he was concerned that the world was increasingly encroaching on our lives due to society’s obsession with consumerism and people’s generally losing their connection to nature. This is certainly no less true today than it was at the turn of the previous century. There are other ways, however, in which the world seems too much with us of late (and, sadly, soon). Just to recap a handful of the things currently going on in the United States, we are more than two years into a deadly global pandemic, which shows only the faintest signs of letting up; we are facing unprecedented threats to democracy; many of our news agencies have rejected objectivity and unbiased reporting as ideals; we are seeing a reemergence of fascist ideologies; we have escalating real estate prices that make it nearly impossible for a large segment of the population to find suitable housing, much less actually purchase a home; and many of our personal interactions have become unbearably vitriolic (particularly those on social media). There is no point in sugarcoating things—it’s ugly out there right now and getting worse each day.

Exacerbating the Problems

The problems detailed above are complicated and their solutions will not come easy, nor will they be easy to implement, but each of those problems, I maintain, are greatly compounded by the way that we interact with one another. The world has become increasingly uncivil. The causes of the incivility can be traced back to a variety of factors, not the least significant of which is tribalism. Our leaders have literally pitted us against one another. This is something that needs to be overcome. In order to make any progress on the more compelling issues that currently confront us, we need to be able to sympathize and empathize with one another, engage in constructive discourse, occasionally compromise, and work in a collaborative spirit to solve problems. That the solutions to political problems are presented to us as games to be won or lost constitutes a real barrier to progress in dealing with these most pressing issues.

Ethics Bowl to the Rescue

While I’m certain that there are some people who like all this incivility, such as those who benefit from it or those who seek drama, I suspect that most of us would prefer it if things were different. And yet, we are increasingly uncivil towards one another. This indicates that it’s not enough to desire civility. Civility must be seen as having real value—more value than what we are valuing in those moments when we let go of our civil ways appears to have. Crucially, I think that civility is not the sort of thing that one decides is good and then commits to. As Aristotle teaches, we become ethical through habituation (at least initially). The same holds true for civility.

For the past twenty-three years, I have been heavily involved with the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl. I began as a coach, and eventually moved into the administration of the bowl as a member of various ethics bowl committees, by serving on the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl board, and for seven years serving as the Director of the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl. The Ethics Bowl teaches and promotes rational civil discourse better than any organization that I’m aware of.

For those who are not familiar with the activity, let me provide a little background. Ethics Bowl began as an intercollegiate competition back in the late 1990s and has expanded to high schools, middle schools, private organizations, public organizations, and prisons. It is a debate activity, but the focus is on having the sort of ethical conversations that lead to collaborative progress with respect to various issues. Teams are not assigned a side of the issue; rather, they advocate for the position that they believe is right. A nice feature of ethics bowl is that both teams competing in a round may find themselves mostly in agreement on a particular issue, which often leads to very good conversations which focus on the more nuanced details of how complex problems are to be resolved.

The real work in ethics bowl takes place as teams work together to prepare their positions. Teams are given 15 cases to work on a couple of months prior to the day of the competition. The cases are designed to be balanced with compelling reasons favoring each side. For example, one recent case focused on certain colleges that require students to work unpaid internships. These seem to benefit the students insofar as they gain valuable hands-on work experience, while simultaneously arguably exploiting the students. While case positions are being developed team members must come to a consensus about the position that their team will take. Moreover, teams must identify and be able to articulate the strongest arguments for the various competing viewpoints. Here is where the students really learn to engage in complex moral decision-making. The types of vitriolic sloganeering that take the place of engaged argumentation on social media and the like simply will not cut it in an ethics bowl competition. In order to succeed at ethics bowl, teams must display understanding of competing viewpoints.

What I’ve seen consistently in my years with the ethics bowl is participants gaining a strong appreciation of the ethics bowl process of getting to the heart of issues by understanding the viewpoints of all the stakeholders and working collaboratively to find the best possible solution. It carries over to the way they interact with others, the way they approach ethical issues going forward, and the way they comport themselves on social media. I’ll share a story to illustrate what I’m talking about. In 2000 I coached a very good team of ethics bowlers at San Jose State University. At the national championship, we advanced to the semifinal round and competed against a really impressive team from Texas. The opposing team presented their case. Prior to responding to the other team’s case, a member of the SJSU team, Gary Buzzell, said to the opposing team “We have some things to say about your presentation, but before we begin, I’d just like to say that was the best case I heard all day.” We lost that round, and I left feeling overwhelmed with pride in my team. That is what ethics bowl teaches.

A Few Caveats

While Ethics Bowl is an excellent way of promoting rational civil discourse, I feel compelled to mention a few caveats to the general line I’m taking. First, as was suggested above, I don’t want to overstate the value of civil discourse. Civility will not solve any of the problems mentioned at the start of this post (except, of course, for the one about how uncivil we’ve become). An increase in civility is just one among many things that need to happen before real progress can occur with respect to solving our problems. Incivility constitutes an obstacle to making progress on the more pressing issues that face us. Second, civility is not always called for. A number of philosophers have pointed out that there are times when dispassionate civil discourse is not an appropriate response to circumstances folks may find themselves in. I couldn’t agree with this more. Often cries for civility are means of preserving an unacceptable status quo or creating diversions from real issues. Thus, to clarify, my position is that when civility is warranted, we can look to Ethics Bowl as a model for how to teach and promote it. Finally, some philosophers have raised concerns about gamification. Here the thought would be that there is something sad about the gamification of civility as a means of promoting it. I’m sympathetic to this way of thinking, and yet here we are—our entire predicament strikes me as exceedingly sad. If a game such as Ethics Bowl can help promote civility, then under the present circumstances, I’m all in favor of it.

I encourage everyone to get involved with Ethics Bowl. If you are a student, then compete. If you are an academic, then coach. Everyone else can sign up to judge or moderate. No one leaves an ethics bowl competition unimpressed and at least a bit more optimistic.

Richard Greene

Richard Greene is Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Richards Richards Institute for Ethics at Weber State University. He is the past Director of the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl. He is the author of Spoiler Alert: It’s a Book About the Philosophy of Spoilers, and  a co-author of Conspiracy Theories in the Time of Coronavirus. He co-hosts the popular podcast I Think, Therefore I Fan.