Instigator / Pro
28
1392
rating
53
debates
24.53%
won
Topic

There Exists Objectively Good and Objectively Bad Music

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
12
0
Sources points
8
0
Spelling and grammar points
4
0
Conduct points
4
0

With 4 votes and 28 points ahead, the winner is ...

seldiora
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Music
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
0
1445
rating
10
debates
35.0%
won
Description
~ 212 / 5,000

for pro to win, he must prove there is some absolute (factual, scientific, etc.) measure which you can measure some songs good and bad. He does not have to prove every song can be judged as such, only some songs.

Round 1
Pro
Firstly, I will try to define objectively bad music, as there are actually many ideas about this already.
1. Artistic license: Creativity and ownership of music is very important especially in the modern day. Copyright laws have been imposed upon songs, as https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ56a.pdf would explain to us. There are even more restrictions that even scare people to make music https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/features/music-copyright-lawsuits-chilling-effect-935310/, as it would be have legal repercussions as a result if you copied someone else. As a result, we can infer that using the same phrase as someone else and claiming it as your own is objectively bad music. 

2. Means to an end: Many cases music has caused hate or unnecessary violence, this is when music is objectively bad. As https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/04/when-music-is-violence argues, we used music to intimidate the opponent, and even used to agitate prisoners. Because of the inherent negative nature of these songs, it follows as such that this music is objectively bad in this case. We want to maximize our happiness gain, utilitarianism claims. But this controversial technique to use music negatively surely violates this moral philosophy and is hence objectively bad. Consider if I made a song specifically to torture terrorists, nails on the chalkboard, screaming at 130 decibels, shredding metal and talking trash about them. This is clearly bad music, especially considering if I played it for anyone else they would be extremely agitated and feel bad about themselves.

Objectively good music is much harder to define, but there are some contenders.
1. Influence on society: Would you admit that, if music caused some good change and educated them, then it has a net benefit? Consider the elements of the periodic table song. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz4Dd1I_fX0) It definitively helps children learn about science in a fun and easy way. Some other songs are far more influential, especially tribal songs uniting people together, and classical music revolutionizing the piano. If music can bring people together and improve your knowledge, why wouldn't it be "good music"? As such, you can clearly see some songs can be objectively good. 

2. "Objectively good" for the person: It's true that people think differently about music, so overall a song might seem more subjective, especially if its impact on actual humanity is too ambiguous to grasp. But listening to music you love brings you dopamine, the happiness chemical. (https://www.psypost.org/2019/02/listening-to-the-music-you-love-will-make-your-brain-release-more-dopamine-study-finds-53059) Once again bringing back the utilitarianism argument, so long as you aren't hurting anyone else, the music will improve your quality of life and possibly raise you out of depression, if you are sad. As such, every song that an individual likes is objectively good for them.
Con
Forfeited
Round 2
Pro
extend
Con
Forfeited
Round 3
Pro
eee
Con
Forfeited