The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Batman is the best D.C superhero

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2012 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,535 times Debate No: 21744
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




Batman by far is the best D.C Superhero he is a human and has the tools and intelligence to take down any hero or villain. Feel free to try and prove me wrong.
Debate Round No. 1



I will begin this debate going light no need to go overboard right away but I wlll point this one fact out, the fact that Batman is a normal human being. My point being he does not have have any super powers to aid him in battle. To compensate for this he relies on his wealth, intellect, and martial arts. I will point out certain movies and comics that show Batman utilizing these tools to save not only citizens of Gotham but also saving members of the justice leauge as well. And also how his intelligence almost literally destroyed the Justice Leauge but that's for later. I don't want to say too much in the early rounds.


I will be going about this debate in two ways. Firstly, I will discredit Batman as "the best superhero" And secondly, I will be providing a better candidate for best superhero: The Flash.

1. Batman cannot be the best superhero simply because of basic definition. Superhero is defined as
"A benevolent fictional character with superhuman powers, such as Superman [1]."
Seeing as Batman does not have superhuman powers, he is not a superhero and therefore cannot be the best superhero.

2. Perhaps the best superhero is The Flash. The Flash is also a human, but with the ability to run faster than the speed of sound (light in some cases), use superhuman reflexes and vibrate through solid objects [2]. He is not only smart and strong, but also funny. Seeing as my opponent has the burden of proof, I ask him to not only show to us how Batman is a superhero, but also how he is better than The Flash.

The Batman is not a superhero by definition and is not better than The Flash.

I turn it over to my opponent.

Debate Round No. 2


  • Well your source you gave on the term superhero credits Batman as a superhero if you actually read the whole thing since he is a coustumed crime fighter. And costumed crime fighters are deemed superheroes.
  • Though Batman does not inherit superhuman powers as I mentioned in the previous round he relies on his intelligence, athletic prowess and his abilities as a detective.
  • He is also one of the most proficient martial artist in all of the D.C. universe his skills are said to rival Lady Shiva, Bronze Tiger, and Richard Dragon.
  • His Batsuit also aids him in combat it protects him from gunfire and other significant impacts.
  • His most defining characteristic is his high moral aptitude and his refusal to take a life. Regardless of the situation with which he is faced.
  • And to acknowledge Batman as a superhero Superman himself says " Sometimes, I admit I think of Bruce as a man in a costume then with some gadget from his utility belt reminds me that he has a extraordinary mind and how lucky I am to be able to call on him".
  • Batman also has taken on and defeated a vast majority of foes ranging from common criminals to outlandish supervillains.




Thank you, Pro, for your argument.

I would like to start again by showing that Batman is not a superhero. I will conclude with some facts about The Flash.

Is The Batman a Superhero?
No, because although being a costumed crime fighter is one of the criteria to be a superhero, another very important criteria is having superpowers (see superhero defenitions). Being a good martial artist or having a high IQ is not a superpower seeing as any human can be a good martial artist and any lucky child can be born a genius. Since The Batman does not have superpowers, he cannot be "The Best Superhero."

Superhero Definitions
[1]: "By strict definitions, characters require actual superhuman powers to be deemed superheroes."
[2]: "A figure, especially in a comic strip or cartoon, endowed with superhuman powers and usually portrayed as fighting evil or crime."
[3]: "A fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers; also: an exceptionally skillful or successful person."

My Opponent's Debate
As to address the rest of my opponent's argument, anyone could rattle off facts about any superhero. You are not establishing The Batman as better than any superhero. I will match every single one of your Batman facts with some about The Flash.

Though The Flash does inherit superhuman powers as I mentioned in the previous round, he relies on his intelligence, athletic prowess and his abilities as a chemist.
He is also one of the fastest superheros in all of the D.C. Universe. His speed is said to rival Superman, kid Flash, and other speedsters.
His speedsuit can shrink to a size that fits on a ring due to a special gas he creates that shrinks cloth fibers to a fraction of their original size.
He has a high moral aptitude and refuses to take a life. Regardless of the situation with which he is faced.
Batman also has taken on and defeated a vast majority of foes ranging from common criminals to outlandish supervillians.

As you can see, The Batman is not more special than The Flash, or any superhero for that matter, when all the opponent presents is a wide range of facts.

The Batman is not a superhero and he is not more special than other superheroes. I turn it over to the pro.

Debate Round No. 3


Time to get serious you forget thay my argument is stating not only is Batman the best superhero but also he has the tools to take down any hero or villain. And you chose The Flash which is commendable. And you frequently bring up the Flash's abilities which is cool and all but you have yet to explain how he can stop batman from taking him down. It's a part of my initial argument that you completely ignored but before I address that I'd like to point out one of your three Superhero definitions actually fits Batman. So you once again defined Batman as a superhero while trying to disprove him as a superhero with actual definitions which also raises a red flag you may not know much about Batman to rebuttal this another way.

The Tower of Babel Arc:

I will now focus on the Tower of Babel JLA comic book arc. You know when Batman has stored files on the weaknesses and strengths of each Justic Leauge member. Amd a method of taking them down as a contingency plan the Injustice Leauge returns or if one of the heroes decided to go rouge on their own. The Flash was taken down by one of Batman's contingency plans which was a specially designed " vibra -bullet" that struck him in the back of the neck, causing him to experience seizures at light speed before it was destroyed by Superman's heat vision. Although he was exposed to the weapon for 22 minutes Wally's relative speed makes the experience feel like months.

- Side note though Batman has no virtual super powers the Tower of Babel arc is a excellent example of my initial argument that Batman can take down any hero or villain. Granted it should be noted in the Tower of Babel it was infact Ra's Al Ghul that used the contingency plans against against the Justice Leauge. It was Batman's plan of attack to take each of them down if he needed to. And I do not need to stress how close each hero came to almost their ends respectively.


You fail again at disproving Batman as a superhero, you also fail at arguing both points ofmy initial statement. What you succeed in doing however is repeating the Flash's abilities. And you succed in once again not explaining how Batman cannot take down take down any hero or villain. Well the Flash in your case since this is whom you based you argument on.



Thank you, Pro, for your rather hostile argument.

Pro's argument can be taken down in two ways: technicalities and comic book knowledge. I will use both methods.

The Three Blaring Technicalities
1. The Batman does not have a superpower as addressed before and therefore cannot be the best superhero.
2. Being the con, I do not have to prove anything. It is the duty of the pro to prove both parts of his argument, both that Batman is a superhero and that he can take down any hero or villain. Con has failed to do so and instead challenges me to prove that Batman cannot.
3. The Batman cannot take down any superhero or villain because he lacks access to more than half of them. They exist in various universes such as the Marvel Universe. For example, Batman cannot take down Spiderman because they are in different Universes.

The Comic Book Debate
Although the Batman may have access to the Tower of Babel, Batman does not have what it takes to take down his archenemy, the Joker. In the entire comic book series, the Joker runs rampant leading goonies and other villains to cause madness in Gotham City.
Besides the Joker, the Batman gets defeated many times by lesser opponents if defeat just means loses a battle. Batman is not an invincible hero. The point of Batman is to have a human hero and part of that means that he will get defeated like he has in many battles.
Finally, I'd like to see how the Pro can prove that Batman has what it takes to defeat "Doomsday." Doomsday, the overpowered villain endowed with super strength, super speed, super agility (dodges vibra-bullets), super endurance among other abilities, killed Superman and other superheroes. I sincerely believe that The Batman is no match for him.

The Batman is still not a superhero. The Batman still cannot take down every hero/ villain. Because both of these facts are true both technically and in the comic book sense, the pro still has much work to do in the last argument.
Debate Round No. 4


Things to state to get started:

- Technically you forfeited this debate by changing your argument entierly if I recall your rebuttal to my initial debate was infact that the Flash was the superior superhero compared to Batman. And you stuck with that until last round when I mentioned the Tower of Babel where Batman's contingency plan led to the near death of The Flash and when faced with this fact you were unable to rebuttal so mid debate you switch up your stance.

- You also fail to realize although you are con and disagreeing with my stance it is your duty to explain to the last grain why your original argument which was The Flash being better than Batman. Which you was unable to do I will admit you remained true to your stance on the definition of Superhero. But riddle me this if Batman is not a superhero how is a member of The Justice Leauge of America? If I am not mistaken is that not a faction of superheroes Batman included.

-Out of courtesy to my opponent I will address his outlandish new argument when faced with presumable defeat.

Comic book knowledge:

- If you understand Batman which I doubt you do at this point you would know his ideals especially how he flatly refuses to take a life. Explaining the Joker's constant running around Gotham City, it is also true that Batman thwarts a majority of the Jokers plans. I am not saying Batman is perfect, I am proclaiming he is the best. Every superhero has their flaws and this is true as you said Batman is a " human hero", he is defeated at times and he also comes back with a plan to take his opponent(s) down. The Tower of Babel is a good example of this.

- The idea of Marvel and D.C. clashing is a debate in itself but to briefly explain what would happen if Spider-Man and Batman were to clash Batman would gather intel on Spiderman and most likely attack Spiderman's weakness which is his sense of responsiblity. The same tactic the Green Goblin used against Spiderman though Batman would not go as far since he is a Superhero after all.

- Another way Batman could defeat Spider- Man is simply using one of his gadgets to distract Spider- Man to cause his Spider sense to not work correctly and take hin down. Or he can simply do battle and wait out his web cartridges and attack him then. Spiderman's speed and agility can be combated by Batman for his Batsuit would be able to endure the assault Spiderman is well capable of. And Batman's use of gadgets and martial arts can be a factor in Spiderman's defeat. Hypothetically speaking if the two were to clash.

Doomsday addressal:

- As we all know Doomsday is practically invincible so there is no conventional way that Batman can take him down in a bare knucke fight. And it is known that everytime he is defeated he returns modified so he cannot be taken down the same way. It would be best accomplish if Batman had time to think up a strategy to take him down. But even in the event that plan succeeds Doomsday would return adapted to that tactic. This is difficult because Batman and Doomsday never really had their own showdown so this is all based off of an assumption.

Closing statement:

Batman by conventional means is a superhero as it was stated earlier in one of the sources my oppnent used a hero without powers but a mask vigilante is also in the superhero genre. His intelligence and skills have helped him topple super villains and at times it has even been used to take down superheroes if the time called for it. I call him the best because in whatever arc Batman is in he gets the job done, he plays a pivotal part in my of the Justice Leauge arcs. A good example of Batman saving the day is actually in the Apocalypse movie when Super Girl first comes to Earth but is taken and brainwashed by Darkseid. It was Batman who faced Darkseid and threatened to detonate the hell spores which would blow up Apokolips if he did not agree to free Super Girl and leave her alone. This act even earned the approval of Darkseid himself.

Sources :


Thank you, pro, for this great debate.

I will be finishing off this argument by making rebuttals to every single one of my opponent's point.

Forfeiting the Debate
Pro makes the argument that I have forfeited the debate because The Flash cannot defeat the Batman. While it is true that The Batman can beat The Flash, the debate is not "The Batman can beat a superhero of your choice," but rather "The Batman can beat any superhero or villain using his intelligence and tools." When I realized that The Batman did indeed beat The Flash, I had to switch to a new counterargument.

Batman is a superhero because he is in the Justice League of America
The Pro agreed that technically, Batman does not fall under the definition of a superhero because he has no superpowers, but since he is in the Justice League of America, he is a superhero. This is false because many non-superheroes are on the Justice League as well. These include The Green Arrow and The Black Canary [1].

The Joker Argument
In this portion of the debate, Pro makes the statement, "he is defeated at times," which is more than enough to win this debate. It is the duty of the Pro to prove that Batman can defeat anyone, but if the Batman can be defeated, clearly he cannot defeat everyone. Not to mention, stopping most of the Joker's plans is not defeating him. The Joker still gets away with much havoc.

Spiderman vs. The Batman
I believe that Pro misunderstood my point. My point was not "Spiderman can defeat The Batman," but rather "The Batman cannot defeat Spiderman" because they exist in different Universes so a clash between them could not ever happen. By claiming that The Batman can defeat ANY superhero, the pro makes the mistake of failing to address superheroes that exist in other dimensions that could never end up in a brawl with the Batman.

This is the core of my debate. Doomsday is a villain famous for the murder of countless superheroes. Every time he is "taken down" he returns stronger than before. There is no way for the Batman to defeat him simply because he is "invulnerable"[2]. The opponent clearly concedes this topic.

Batman is not a superhero and even if he were there are many superheroes/villains he is incapable of defeating such as The Joker, Spiderman, and Doomsday.Seeing as I have addressed and rebutted all of my opponents arguments and he has not met the burden of proof, I urge the audience to vote for the Con.

Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Zaradi 6 years ago
Okay, like I said before, I didn't think that this debate was good. At all. Pro mistakened the BOP to be on the con to prove why he isn't. But in this type of debate, the BOP is always on the instigator (in this case it was pro) to prove why the resolution is true. Thus, if I'm doubting a bit of pro's rebuttals, which I find myself doing a bit, then I can give con strength of link into the BOP and vote there. That, actually, is what I end up doing off of the definition debate.

I don't buy pro's argument that con's first definition source says that a superhero is a costumed fighter or whatever. Then again, I didn't like the "source" (it was a google search page) much to begin with, so I disregard that source. But when three more are provided saying the same thing as before, I give that argument to con, thus giving him an adequete link into the BOP to block the aff from fulfilling it. If Batman isn't a superhero, it's impossible for him to actually be the best DC superhero, thus making the resolution false. So that's how I vote.

I thought that both sides could've done a massively better job. The pro explaining exactly how Batman qualified, under the pro's definitions or a newly provided one (provided that the pro gives me a way to weigh between the two definitions), to be a superhero. If he would be a superhero, I would probably be voting pro because he's winning that Batman could probably take all the other superheroes in a hypothetical fight. The Doomsday example I feel is an abusive argument because both sides acknowledge that nothing can defeat it, thus making it sort of non-unique.

Since I'm running out of characters, I'll finish really quickly. Con could've spent more time defending and strengthening his definiton debate, which was the strongest point in his case. Pro could've done better refuting it. Overall, a dissapointing debate from both sides, but con was definetely the winner.
Posted by Zaradi 6 years ago
I disagree with beastmaster. This was a god-awful debate. Regardless, my vote will be in momentarily. RFD will probably be in the comments.
Posted by beatmaster2012 6 years ago
This is gonna be good.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Yeah, RFD in comments.