Instigator / Con
0
1500
rating
4
debates
25.0%
won
Topic
#4233
Books provide better entertainment than television
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Winner
0
1
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
YouFound_Lxam
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
1
1472
rating
32
debates
48.44%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Con
#1
These are my reason for why Tv is a better entertainment source than books.
1. Shows are easier to understand as the information can be seen instead of having to be pictured in your mind which leads to a more complete comprehension of the material
2. Shows can be watched more passively and in a more leisurely state as, unless you are listening to a book they require more mental work to fully understand and enjoy.
3. Relating to my first point comics, mangas etc can't fully depict everything in a scene and shows can depict events better.
4. Shows are more dramatic and emotional as being able to directly get information from sightvis more impactful than reading words and having to render the images in your mind.
Pro
#2
Thank you Con, for this debate.
Arguments:
I believe that books provide better entertainment than television for a couple of reasons.
1.) Books give you the opportunity to experience the scenery with your own mind, therefore your mind will make visions of what you want to see rather than what is shown to you.
2.) Books put less strain on your eyes, and increase your ability to become more creative. It doesn't take more brain power to read a book than it does to watch a show.
3.) Books provide better emotional entertainment, based on who you are as a person, because again, it's your brain showing you what you want to perceive. This is why pornographic books are very popular with women.
Rebuttals:
1. Shows are easier to understand as the information can be seen instead of having to be pictured in your mind which leads to a more complete comprehension of the material
Seeing information isn't easier to comprehend than picturing it in your mind, and in fact, I would argue the opposite. Your mind would have time to slow down, and comprehend whatever speed you want to read at, instead of keeping up with the predetermined speed of a show or movie.
2. Shows can be watched more passively and in a more leisurely state as, unless you are listening to a book they require more mental work to fully understand and enjoy.
Again, even with listening to a book, you have to keep up with a predetermined timing. When reading a book, you get to set that speed to your liking, therefore making your reading experience more enjoyable, and up to your comfort level.
3. Relating to my first point comics, mangas etc can't fully depict everything in a scene and shows can depict events better.
Comics usually are not considered books, because the whole point of a book is to picture what you want through the use of words. Comics have predetermined pictures that force you to perceive the story in a different way than you might have.
4. Shows are more dramatic and emotional as being able to directly get information from sightvis more impactful than reading words and having to render the images in your mind.
Completely dissagree.
Books show way more emotion especially in the writing styles of some. Movies and shows show physical representation of emotion, while books let you experience those emotions through yourself. Your emotions are always the most powerful and impactful to yourself.
I can't wait for your response.
Round 2
Con
#3
Next arguments:
1. Music is an extremely effective and impactful element in story telling that can create joy, fear, sadness, and more which books don't have.
2. Tv can be enjoyed in groups and helps bonding with friends and family and while books can be enjoyed in groups Tv is better at being enjoyed in groups.
3. Books take longer to finish then shows and people might not want to read through an entire book.
4. Shows and movies can do subtle references and Easter eggs such as Community which books can't do as effectively.
5. People are more inclined to re watch a movie or Tv show rather than re read a book or moments of it.
Rebuttals
1. I know that this can apply to poor movies as well but if I book is written poorly or with typos it can ruin the impact and make it harder to understand, more so than Tv in my opinion
Round 3
Con
#5
Website that show statistic about Tv being a better source of entertainment than books:
Pro
#6
I apologize to my contestant for forfeiting the last round, I lost track of time.
Let's move on, shall we?
So, Con doesn't provide a lot of rebuttals to my arguments, only brings up more arguments.
I will do my best to reply to Cons arguments and respond to his rebuttal.
Rebuttals:
1. Music is an extremely effective and impactful element in story telling that can create joy, fear, sadness, and more which books don't have.
This is true. Music in shows and movies can manipulate one's emotions on a dramatic level. But I don't see how this makes movies better than books, because like I said before, you can also re-create these emotions in your head, on a level that movies can't, because your brain knows you the best, and can control what scene you are imagining while reading a book, and can trigger stronger emotions, than a predetermined thing.
2. Tv can be enjoyed in groups and helps bonding with friends and family and while books can be enjoyed in groups Tv is better at being enjoyed in groups.
This claim seems valid, but in actuality isn't.
For instance, the Christain church is a massive group of people, that gather around to read a book, rather than watch a movie.
And the church has been doing this for thousands of years, and people still enjoy it, and it causes massive emotional responses from some.
3. Books take longer to finish then shows and people might not want to read through an entire book.
This entirely depends on the context, like if you binged the show or not, or if you took your time or not.
4. Shows and movies can do subtle references and Easter eggs such as Community which books can't do as effectively.
I would beg to differ.
Books like "Through the Looking-Glass," "The Great Gatsby, and "The Handmaids Tale," are all examples of easter eggs and books, and good ones at that.
5. People are more inclined to re watch a movie or Tv show rather than re read a book or moments of it.
Then explain the Quran, The Bible.
Book series like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, The Chronicles of Narnia. All these book series most people would prefer the book version rather than the TV version, and yet are some of the best created movies.
1. I know that this can apply to poor movies as well but if I book is written poorly or with typos it can ruin the impact and make it harder to understand, more so than Tv in my opinion
The amount of skill it takes to make your reader emotionally in a book is way harder to do, than in a movie, which proves that books are far more advanced, and challenging to make, which makes the outcome even greater.
Most of all the famous philosophers, and great people in history all have written books, not made movies.
Round 4
Pro
#8
I think I have said all I have needed to say.
This was a pretty boring debate, and I honestly didn't put much effort into it, as did my opponent as well.
But I still had fun, and best of luck to my opponent.
Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
Yeah, pretty boring debate.. I believe pro covered mostly all of cons arguments, but I believe con dropped most if not all of pros arguments.
This is honestly straight forward, I vote pro.
Pro in short started talking about making your own scenery, such as looks of characters rather than a movie showing you something. Books put less strain on your eyes than movies and also is possible to increase your creativity. It includes less brain power than a movie. And after that he basically repeats his first argument, but stating "better emotional entertainment".
Con's only rebuttal:
"1. I know that this can apply to poor movies as well but if I book is written poorly or with typos it can ruin the impact and make it harder to understand, more so than Tv in my opinion."
I'm not sure how this even related to con's argument? He never responded towards any of the claims made by pro meaning he dropped them.
Any questions? I'll handle them through messages or comments.
Sorry, I wasn't aware of the time limit. I was busy. I will try my best to finish up on my next round.
Since this is a subjective discussion, you can turn this argument in your favor by citing sources of the amount of people who read books vs watching TV, and how much time they spend doing both of these on average.
This is relative, but you’d win the debate if you prove that books appeal to a larger audience than television.