Many Truths Prevail: Before a record-setting audience of nearly 300 in rural New York Mills—and hundreds more tuning in via livestream—four citizen-philosophers took the stage to tackle this timeless and timely question.

By the end of the night, the audience had cast its votes for who made the strongest argument, choosing David Lose, a pastor from Eden Prairie, MN, as America’s Greatest Thinker 2025, siding with his argument that there are, indeed, many truths.

YES: Freedom of speech IS worth the cost. First-time Think-Off entrant Michelle Mellon of New Mexico was voted America’s Greatest Thinker for 2024, arguing that open opportunities to exchange ideas come with infinite potential for “disruption,” in which personal and social evolution is achieved—moving us each, in our own way, closer to realizing the promise of living life to its “fullest potential.”

THE ENVIRONMENT: Doug McClain of Fergus Falls, MN successfully argued that the environment is more important to protect than the economy, stating that the environment will run without our economy, but without the environment, our economy and those in it will cease to exist. 

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: Blaine Rada of Darien, IL claimed his second “America’s Greatest Thinker” title (the first was in 2005), arguing that “personal choice is often self-driven and self-focused; the greatest, longest-lasting benefits come through social responsibility.” 

RULES: Dan Tschida of Minneapolis, MN successfully argued his stance that playing by the rules is more important than winning.

YES: Minnesotan Jennifer Nelson earned her second “America’s Greatest Thinker” title (her first was in 2014) by successfully arguing that voting DOES matter. Jennifer, a research consultant at the Minnesota House of Representatives, convinced the audience that voting matters because it is an essential part of the overall democratic process.

FAILURE: Anthony Berryhill of Austin, TX won over the crowd with his skillful argument that failure plays a larger role in shaping one’s life, saying, “Embracing losing is what allows us to take risks, be vulnerable and be pioneers.”

YES: In the final round, Pamela Lewis distilled her debate performance and won the majority of audience votes with a paraphrase of John F. Kennedy and her own exposition from his quotation, “We cannot be a fully free society and we cannot be fully human unless we protect our need and our quest for the truth.”

AGREE: Sam Dennison of San Francisco, CA argued in favor of the proposition, saying, “When wealth changes how we see and interact with each other, that’s where the problem comes in.” The audience voted Sam the Greatest Thinker in America and decided that Income Inequality DOES indeed Threaten Democracy.

FREES: David Lapakko of Richfield, MN, asserted that technology frees us, and was voted America’s Greatest Thinker for 2015. Lapakko won the support of the audience by focusing on the many technological advancements in the fields of medicine, transportation, electricity, and more, that do indeed free us to live more full and rewarding lives.

LOVE: Jennifer Nelson of Morris, Minnesota based her case on her personal experience recovering from an automobile crash in 2004, and effectively convinced an enthusiastic crowd that love motivates us to act more than fear.

COMPROMISE: Paul Terry, CEO of StayWell Health Management, won the hearts of the audience with his argument that compromise is more ethical than sticking to principle. Compromise is hard work he told his opponent, Caroline Sposto, in the final round. “Achieving a compromise is actually the best way to stick to my principles,” he added. The Great American Think Off, now in its 21st year, was broadcast live on Lakes Radio.

EVIL: This was the first question of the Think-off posed in 1993 and the audience couldn’t decide. Twenty years later Adam Bright of Syracuse, New York made a compelling argument that humankind is inherently evil.

YES: Marsh Muirhead won the 2011 debate saying yes, poetry matters. Muirhead, a dentist and a poet from Bemidji, Minnesota, used as proof the strong example of the popularity and quality of the poetry of former American poet laureate Billy Collins. His opponent, Mahmood Tabaddor of Rochester, Michigan argued that poetry no longer matters to the large majority of Americans who prefer reality shows on television and fantasy novels to pass the time. The audience, however, voted that yes, poetry does matter.

NO: David Eckel of Clayton, North Carolina, argued No – not because he’s callous or because he’s opposed to giving. He argued that charity isn’t charity if you’ve got no choice. With that, he won the crowd.

YES: John Pollock, a civil rights attorney from Montgomery, Alabama said yes, is it sometimes wrong to do the right thing. He argued that unintended consequences from our belief that we are doing the right thing can lead to greater evil than we can foresee. In the end, the audience agreed that what is right, at least in America, is an evolving set of ideas, not a static set of principles that never changes.

THREATENS: Craig Allen of West Linn, Oregon said it threatens. He argued, and the audience agreed, that the system of immigration and immigration policy is broken. He says it encourages an influx of illegal immigrants and poses a threat to the country.

HEART: Joe Kaiser of Minneapolis, MN was the winner of the 2007 debate. Kaiser’s advice: trust your heart. A first time entrant, he ended up competing against his friend, Paul Allick, an ordained priest from Burnsville, MN.

FREEDOM: Sarah Dennison of Minneapolis, Minnesota was the winner. Sarah pointed out that freedom requires courage but that for the future of humanity we must put freedom first.

COOPERATION: Blaine Rada, a 40 year old training consultant from Brookfield, Illinois was the winner arguing that Cooperation Benefits Society More. In his closing argument Blaine quoted John F. Kennedy when he said “United there is nothing we can’t do, divided there is nothing we can.”

NO: Robert Lerose said no. He said that marriage is the one enduring institution common to all societies throughout history and pointed out that it can change, and in fact has changed, without diminishing its meaning. The 44 year old writer from Uniondale, New York convinced the small town audience of New York Mills, Minnesota that the exclusive commitment of two people to each other, regardless of gender, could only strengthen the custom of marriage.

YES: Brad Buschette said yes and the audience agreed. He said we each have our own internal ethical system that rewards or punishes us on the basis of our actions. The more highly developed that system is, the more obvious it is that we reap what we sow.

NO: Paul Higday of Richmond, Virginia said No. It’s not a matter of which has the right, but which has the might. In today’s world it takes the sword to change societies so the pen can flourish.

YES: Mary Fishler-Fisk of Massachusetts argued for legalization, winning this provocative and often poignant debate with a mere 10 vote lead.

YES: With this debate taking place in June of 2000, the Great American Think-Off was ahead of its time considering the issues that evolved during more recent presidential elections. Both voting audiences; the community audience at the New York Mills Sports Center and the C-SPAN online audience, voted that Peter Hilts’ argument that “YES, DEMOCRACY IS FAIR” was the winner. Hilts is an environmental studies teacher from Lakeville, Minnesota.

SCIENCE: The 1999 Think-Off received essays from contestants in Pakistan, Denmark, Argentina and all over the United States. Mark Friestad, a social studies teacher from North Dakota, won the final debate arguing that science is more dangerous because people often accept it blindly without question.

NO: A record year, the 1998 Think-Off received over 820 essays, and the final debate was broadcast live on C-SPAN. As the country grappled with the spectacle in the White House, the Think-Off audience and the C-SPAN viewing audience agreed with a soft-spoken priest from New York–honesty is not always the best choice.

NO: The 1997 Think-Off received entries from 45 states. The 2001 Think-Off spokesperson, Steve Schulz won by explaining how even though his father was murdered, he feels the death penalty is unethical.

YES: The 1996 Think-Off received over 700 entries from throughout the U.S. After an engaging debate, the audience vote (with many abstentions) decided that God does exist.

MONEY: A 66 year-old retired stenographer and a 16 year-old Eagle Scout argued morality, but were toppled by a graduate student and a UPS worker arguing that money is the most important value in America.

YES: A close debate, but ultimately it was decided that life does have meaning–as proven by commercial fisherman Peter Hilts.

UNDECIDED: A priest, a newspaper editor, a 15 year-old cheerleader and a former tribal police officer made such strong arguments that the audience couldn’t decide if mankind is good or evil, leaving the question forever unresolved. (…Until 2012 when it was debated again, and evil won.)

2024: MPR News: In New York Mills, the Great American Think-Off finalists debate to understand, not to win

2023: Radio interviews about the 2023 Think-Off on It Takes 2 with Amy & JJ of KFGO 790 AM:

• 2022 America’s Greatest Thinker Blaine Rada
• Cultural Center Executive Director Betsy Roder 

2021: WCCO Radio Real Talk with Roshini – Which is more important: to win or to play by the rules?

2014: MPR documentary by Evan Johnson

2012: Short radio interview of Marsh Muirhead returning to Think-off

2007: American Public Media Joe Kaiser reading his essay

1996: NPR Interview

2024: Star Tribune: In a small northwestern Minnesota town, America’s divisiveness meets its match: Civil debate

2024: Great American Philosophy substack by JILL LOUISE LÉGER

2021: Washington Post Magazine, Amateur philosophers compete in the Great American Think-Off

2021: University of Minnesota Alumni Magazine, The Great American Think-Off

2015: Boston Globe, The Great American Think-Off ™ Releases 2015 Essay Question: Does Technology Free Us or Trap Us?

2015: Kansas City Star: The Great American Think-Off ™ Releases 2015 Essay Question: Does Technology Free Us or Trap Us?

2015: TwinCities.com, Minnesota’s Great American Think-Off asks: ‘Does tech free us or trap us?’

2013: StarTribune, Think-Off Goes Beyond Questions

2012: WCCO, 4 Finalists Named For Great American Think-Off

2012: examiner.com, Writing leader thinks on feet for Great American Think-Off

2011: Southwest Journal, Story by finalist Doug Wilhide about his experience

2008: Fox News, Oregon Man Tackles Illegal Immigration to Win Great American Think-Off

2008: Portland Tribune: Winner Craig Allen humble Home Depot employee

2008: NBC weird news announcing winner Craig Allen

2007: Washington Post: Question Announcement

1998: Los Angeles Times: Home of America’s Greatest Thinker

1998: New York Times, THINK TANK; Great American Think-Off: Take 4 Debaters, Stir, Serve to Crowd

1998: Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Sun Writer Enters Contest

1995: Spokane Review, Prisoner Won but Can’t Attend