Batman > Spiderman
Debate Rounds (4)
Batman is a greater hero than Spiderman, easy.
I'll try to convince con that Batman can take on Spiderman any time. Con has to convince Batman can't win from Spiderman. Use movies/comics/games as sources and please link those.
Round 1: acceptance
Round 2: arguments
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Rebuttals/ closing arguments
Batman is going to have to stand on the back burner for now. I accept this debate.
Let's first go over the abilities most superheroes have.
Genius level intellect
Peak physical and mental conditioning
Master Martial Artist
Access to high-tech equipment, gadgets and weapons
Master of stealth
Master of disguise
Billionare thanks to his company
He has (criminal) records on every person
Trained Computer Hacker
Excellent observational skills
Superhuman speed, strength and agility
Ability to cling to almost any surface
Ability to shoot webs from his wrist
Master hand-to hand combatant
#1 Batman's got dirt on everybody
Batman has records of every single person in his batcomputer. Thanks to his intellect and information he could find out every weakness Spiderman has and use it against him. He could plan a scenario in which he wouldn't even have to make any effort and he could beat Spiderman. Even if this wasn't the case, Batman is genious in adapting to his environment.
#2 He can put his money to good use
Batman has something Spidey doesn't, and that is money. It's only natural, Peter Parker is a teenager, Bruce Wayne owns a huge company. He has tons of handy gadgets that Spiderman doesn't. He even once used his money to create his own kryptonite to defeat Superman. I know Green Goblin had once designed a gas that could temporarily shut off Spiderman's spidey-sense. If Goblin could obtain it, Batman can.
#3 Batman is a predator
Batman knows that Spiderman with his sense could easily counter the batarangs or any things Batman has. So he plans his attack carefully. Learning everything he can about the spider, he uses tactics to wait for the perfect moment to strike. Even Spiderman has to replenish his webshooters, even Spiderman gets tired. This can put Batman to his advantage since he's a master escapalogist and can hide almost everywhere (also because he wears a black suit instead of a freaking red-blue suit).
#4 Batman can defeat anybody
When Batman joined the justice league he collected information on every member so he could take them down when they turned against him. And he did. Even Superman knew his temper would be a great enemy so he trusted Batman to take him down when it was that far. And he did. Bane even broke Batman's freaking back once and he recovered. Batman has had several oppertunities to kill the Joker, mr. Freeze, the Penguin, Bane and many others. He doesn't because he's not an executioner.
These are my arguments.
Alright, so before arguing this topic at hand, I must establish the following definition:
Great: Remarkable in magnitude, degree, and effectiveness (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
At the point where this is the actual definition, it means that my opponent's burden for the CON is confusing considering that evaluating this definition would imply not placing the two in combat with one another but evaluating the effectiveness of their heroic actions entirely. With this burden established, I move on to construct my arguments.
Contention 1: Spiderman is a more efficient, effective hero.
When comparing the effectiveness of Spiderman as a hero to the effectiveness of Batman as a hero, you will notice that not only is Spiderman more effective at saving people, but his fewer advantages than Batman has, as my opponent describes he has, can show you that Spiderman is a more efficient hero as well. Death riddles the Batman comics. Whether it is the Joker, Poison Ivy, the Riddler, or the Penguin, we can be sure that there can be plentiful deaths that Batman did not stop in contrast to Spiderman. A perfect example is the newest video game Batman: Arkham City, where almost all of the villains had been able to kill several people throughout the course of the game. Joker killed Talia al Ghul; Strange killed several during his administration of the prison; Killer Croc had secretly been pulling prisoners off the streets and devouring them; the biggest example was Hush, who after slicing off the faces of countless victims was allowed to just leave Arkham City by Batman. If it isn't that Batman fails to save a litany of people, it's that Batman's villains in some way win even after losing. The perfect example is Batman: The Killing Joke, where even though Batman was able to stop the Joker, there was still Barbara Gordon, who had lost her ability to walk because she had been shot in the spine. In Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight, although Joker had been stopped (only after several deaths), the Joker had still managed to prove his worth by destroying Harvey Dent. Spiderman is not that way. We notice throughout Spiderman comics that there are few deaths, if any, by the actions of the villains, and Spiderman is always able to not only defeat them, but also to the fullest extent save everyone, in contrast to Batman, who even with many resources as my opponent claims he has is still incapable of saving people.
Contention 2: Spiderman has powers.
Spiderman is also certainly greater in magnitude when he has the powers that Batman doesn't, as my opponent has clearly pointed out in his own argument, including a Spidey-sense that allows him to be able to detect danger.
Yes, it is unfortunate that Batman can't save every person in Gotham City. You showed as example the game Arkham City, many people have died in that time. But this was not because Batman was too weak or ineffective. It was because almost all of Batman's foes were in an area of, let's say 3 square kilometres. The Joker, the Riddler, Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn, Zasz, Two-Face, the Penguin, mr. Freeze, Solomon Grundy, Hugo Strange, Deadshot, Hush and more were in the same location at the same time. This would be close to impossible to save all of them.
Now let's say if we put Spiderman in Arkham City along with Green Goblin, dr. Octopus, Venom, Sandman, Carnage, Hobgoblin, Kingpin, Beetle, Electro and Mysterio, I'm pretty sure Spiderman wouldn't be able to save every single person as well. Of course I have no evidence for that but a bit of common sense would do. This is also because of the difference in villains. Green Goblin became a villain because he wanted to kill Spiderman and take revenge on those who made him that way (and he did kill them), while Joker is an insane maniac who wants to kill everyone but Batman. This is a huge difference. Also for example dr Octopus wanted revenge on the Spider because he felt humiliated because he was beaten by him (Sensational Spiderman #28).
Also is important that Batman is relatively a more realistic hero than Spiderman. If you take a look at the allies and foes of Batman we see that not much of them have actual powers, while Spiderman's foes definately have superpowers. Deaths in the Batman story adds up to that reality.
Again this is the problem with Batman being really realistic. Batman does not have superpowers but his wealth and intelligence makes up for it. Sure if Spiderman was as smart and rich as Batman, he would be unstoppable with his Spidey-sense, but since he does not..
So, in this debate, it is important to note the following key thing for the evaluation of the round: My opponent made no mentions on the parameters of the round explaining why his burden for me was not adhering to the resolution at hand, so extend this across the flow. For that reason, if I am to prove that Spiderman is a better overall hero (as in, he's better at doing what a hero would do), then I am the winner of this debate today.
Efficiency Argument: To be fair to Batman, my opponent makes a lot of sense with the Arkham City argument. If it were Spiderman going against Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Venom, Sandman, Carnage, Hobgoblin, Kingpin, Beetle, Electro, and Mysterio in one small radius, I'm sure that not everyone would be saved. The problem for Batman, however, is that this circumstance of practically everyone dying is not only in Arkham City. It happened in the previous game. It happens in pretty much all of the modern comics of Batman, in contrast to all of the Spiderman comics, where pretty much all of the people therein are saved. This shows you that Spiderman is a more effective hero, and since he has far fewer resources than Batman, this also shows you that he is much more efficient nonetheless. The comic book villains are not all too different, actually, especially with the Joker, considering that there are several times that Joker tries to kill him and has actually mentioned that he wants him dead, such as in Batman: Arkham Asylum, where he tells the following to him: "Why don't you just roll over and die for once? Please? Be your best friend." If not this, then also the following: "I was hoping [Bane] would crumple you like a piece of paper and stamp you crazy, but even I don't get everything I want."
Contention 2: Regardless of Batman being more realistic, he stills lives in a fictional world where Spiderman and Batman are equally possible to occur, and at the point where Batman fails to save a large amount of people in contrast to Spiderman, I would disagree in the idea that his wealth and intelligence make up for it.
beatmaster2012 forfeited this round.
My opponent has completely dropped this debate at the final round, so everything that I said before this round is extended across the flow. At the very least, at this point, I should have the conduct vote for being punctual to every single one of my rounds in this debate, and in order to receive the argument vote in this debate, I will present the following explanations:
Reason 1: My opponent has completely accepted the burden that I have established from the resolution and rejected the burden he has placed in his own case. Therefore, we are evaluating in this case which one is better at heroics rather than who would win in a fight against one another, as I have explained in my definition of the resolution, and since my opponent's case is entirely centered on which one has more power than the other rather than which is more effective and has more advantages as a hero, it is immediate that my case is already preferrable to evaluate than my opponent's.
Reason 2: My opponent pretty much drops everything that I have said with regard to efficiency, meaning that this debate further leans toward me in the idea that Spiderman is more effective and efficient in his heroics than Batman has been based on everything that we have seen in their previous comics. Therefore, I have proven to you that Spiderman is the more effective hero, and henceforth, the better hero.
Reason 3: To add to that, I have explained to you how Spiderman has powers and even with his limitless resources, Batman is still incapable of saving as many people as Spiderman does...if not defeating his enemies completely in contrast to the Batman villains, where they almost always seem to win in some way.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by WriterDave 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.