Draft Charter for Responsible Public Debate

February 2020

Democratic politics has always been a place of discussion, disagreement and debate. However, recent
politics – especially in the age of social media – seems to be increasingly polarised. This raises the
question of whether there are better and worse ways to address contentious issues in public political
discussions. More broadly, we need ways of debating controversial topics with each other in ordinary
discussions amongst family members, in schools, at workplaces, as part of community organisations,
and online, while still recognising common ground and striving to achieve common purpose.

To that end, we propose a set of principles grounded in an ideal of public debate as informed,
respectful, and inclusive discussion amongst those who initially disagree but who listen well to each
other in pursuit of common ground and common cause. Such debate involves rethinking what it
means to be ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ opens up more space for concession and collaboration. It aims to build
consensus, amongst a wide group of people from diverse backgrounds with different experiences,
abilities, and knowledge. We hope that identifying a set of shared principles for discussing
contentious issues can make these discussions more constructive and productive while also
strengthening our bonds to one another.

To this end, we propose the following principles for a charter for responsible public debate:

Informed
1. Aim for accuracy, and base your contributions on evidence and experience.
2. Talk to people with different beliefs, experiences, perspectives and backgrounds.
3. Be honest in how you communicate, and speak with conviction for what you believe.

Respectful
4. Listen carefully, open-mindedly, and with empathy.
5. Use emotional language judiciously, avoiding disrespectful or inflammatory language.
6. Show appreciation for good points made by others, acknowledging when they change your mind.

Inclusive
7. Communicate in ways that unite rather than divide.
8. Try to address imbalances in power, knowledge and accessibility.
9. Seek to identify common ground and shared purpose.

This charter was initially drafted at a Young Academy of Scotland workshop at the Royal Society of Edinburgh hosted by Matthew
Chrisman, Alice König, Peter McColl, and John O’Connor. Invited speakers included: Harriet Harris, Ken Macintosh, Stephen
Reicher, Kathleeen Stock, Kal Turnbull, Jim Wallace, Kirsty Wark. YAS key discussants were Maria Azeredo de Dornelas, James
Blake, Stephen O’Rourke, Nasar Meer, Nikki Moran. It has been refined and revised in light of online forum discussion and in public events
at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, the Scottish Parliament Festival of Politics, and the Millenifest. It has also benefited greatly from feedback
at the YAS plenary meeting in December 2019.

Our hope is for this to form the basis for further public reflection on responsible public debate and to be adaptable for more specific
educational and civic contexts. We have several upcoming public events that will be announced on our website. Please get involved by
giving feedback online at www.youngacademyofscotland.org.uk/responsible-debate.html, spreading the word, and tweeting
@YoungAcademySco under #YASResponsibledebate. If you have suggestions for other places to discuss this draft charter, please contact
matthew.chrisman@ed.ac.uk.

Social acts of mind…can have no existence without the intervention of some other intelligent being, who
acts a part in them. —Thomas Reid, Founding Fellow of the RSE
 Testing our Charter for Responsible Debate
Drafting a Charter for Responsible Debate is only one step in a much longer process of effecting
culture-change. If we want to improve the ways in which we discuss contentious issues of shared
concern, i.e. ‘debate’ with each other, we need to start practicing what our charter preaches: or at least
we need to find out what difference that might make.

We need your help in this! Will you test out our charter for us? We are looking for volunteers to put
our draft charter through its paces by trying to adopt its principles in everyday life.

For example, you could try it out:

 at home over the dinner table
 in meetings at work
 in school classrooms or university seminars
 on social media
 at public gatherings

We need to know if it is fit for purpose: if it makes a positive difference to how people agree or
disagree with each other, and if we need to keep refining our principles.

Will you tell us how you and your fellow ‘debaters’ got on with our draft charter?
 Did you find our principles difficult or easy to follow? (How? Why?)
 Which principles were more doable than others?
 Did some make a more positive difference than others? (Which?!)
 What aspects of contentious public debate do our principles not help with?
 In what contexts do you think it’d be helpful for people to discuss or acknowledge shared
principles of responsible debate before engaging in ‘debate’?

If you test out our draft charter in your home or workplace, will you let us know how you got on? You
can fill in a quick survey on our Responsible Debate webpage: tinyurl.com/y6c7srnu.

Thank you for your help!