About Us
The people and the purpose behind DebateScore
Who we are
We're Julian and Paul — two brothers driven by a shared fascination with how people think, argue, and decide. One of us reached the finals of the German debating championship and spent years inside the machinery of competitive argument; the other builds learning tools grounded in cognitive science. We believe most people truly want to do good — but too often, our conversations get lost in noise, confusion, and division.
That's why we started DebateScore: to design a framework that fits the human mind — one that helps debates lead toward better outcomes, not louder ones. Our goal is simple but ambitious: to help people truly understand each other's perspectives, find common ground, and build a better future together.
Why We Started DebateScore
Growing up in the '90s and early 2000s, we felt a sense of optimism — a belief that the world was moving toward unity, understanding, and progress. But in recent years, we've seen how easily that hope can be overshadowed by polarization and misunderstanding.
We created DebateScore because democracies keep producing bad decisions — not occasionally, but predictably — because the system for evaluating arguments was never engineered for that purpose. Aviation faced the same challenge: fallible humans making consequential decisions under pressure. The solution was not better pilots, but better systems around ordinary ones. We believe the same engineering approach can work for public debate. When we can see how arguments are built — what's fact, what's value, and how strong each claim really is — we move past confusion and focus on what truly matters.
The Team
Paul
Paul studied Cognitive Science and Education Technology, founded PearUp (an ed-tech startup helping students learn with motivation), and now develops learning products at a digital education platform. His passion lies in designing tools that make complex ideas understandable and engaging.
Julian
Julian is a Berlin-based engineer with a master's degree in aviation and human factors engineering. He reached the finals of the German debating championship twice, served as president of the Berlin Debating Union, and spent years inside the machinery of competitive argument. He is the author of The Best Argument Wins, which lays the theoretical foundation for GDES. His focus: building systems that match how people actually think and decide.