Please understand that I will only accept challenges from those who can demonstrate a very high level of expertise in the area under discussion.

For academics, that means a relevant teaching or research position in a top-tier university (Ivy League, Oxbridge, or equivalent). 

For non-academics, or those from other academic institutions, the onus is on you to demonstrate why you are a uniquely important challenger.

In all cases, you will need to have a familiarity with my latest book in order to meaningfully challenge my ideas.

The debates will take place in writing on a custom-built online forum. It will be publically viewable, but only you and I will have the ability to post.

These debates will not have many formal rules, but there are a few.

1: You will use your real name, academic title (if applicable) and a clear photograph of yourself, in your user profile.

2: You will eschew the use of specialised jargon, speaking in plain English for the benefit of non-specialised readers.

3: All the writing posted in this debate will be surrendered to the public domain. This is to stop DMCA requests being used by the loser of the debate to expunge their failure from the internet. 

4: If you fail to reply to a post within a one-week period, the debate will be closed and you will be marked as having abandoned it. This is not necessarily the same as a defeat.

5: Once a response is posted, the only edits permissible are typo corrections.

I understand that these terms are unacceptable to many academics (and others) who wish to keep their reputations protected from all risk of public failure.

My only response to that is to say that these rules cut both ways, and are also a risk for me. If someone can break my credibility in public debate, they are demonstrating their clear superiority over me, in front of my paying clients. If I were one of my clients and I watched that happen, I would attempt to professionally engage the winner, not the loser of that debate.

If I’m prepared to take that kind of chance with my livelihood, and you are not, I fail to see how that reflects badly on myself.

If you wish to lay a debate challenge, by all means do so below. Due to time constraints, I can only engage in one ongoing debate at any given time.

To date, there have been no credible challenge attempts.