The Instigator
jujeahyun111
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
NewCreature
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Chopsticks are better than forks

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 10,938 times Debate No: 18526
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

jujeahyun111

Pro

I would not need to explain what chopsticks are.

I assume the position that a set of chopsticks is a superior eating utensil to a fork.

I compare chopsticks with forks because they are equivalent to each other for several reasons.
- they are both used to pick up solid pieces of food
- they are both used primarily when eating noodles

The reasons I find chopsticks superior are follows.
- They allow for a more precise manipulation of food
- A frequent user can use chopsticks to pick up food at once at least as much as one can with a fork
- They are easier to produce, maintain and dispose
a) Chopsticks have massively simpler design, believe it or not (chopsticks can be made from plastic, metal, wood with practically no change in it's design, for example.)
b) Chopsticks have no unreachable slots as found on forks (it is hard to clean in between the prongs of the thicker forks, while no such problem is present with chopsticks), meaning better wash-ability and, thus, better hygiene.
c) Wooden disposable chopsticks are not only good eating utensils, but also a useful building material in arts and crafts. Also, wooden forks are hard to come by, hinting to chopsticks' better manufacturability. Metal and plastic chopsticks have at least as much recyclability as forks made with the same material.
d) Metal chopsticks can be made lighter by hollowing them out (this affects strength little and actually reduces heat conductivity of the chopsticks, which make them more suited when eating hot food with a lot of broth, such as a bowl of ramen or beef stew).
- Believe it or not, chopsticks can be used to cut (or split) some food, which is hard with a lone fork. Though this use is primarily limited to Korea, chopsticks can be used to split thin meat and practically any vegetable save anything too thick, such as broccoli stems which would not be served in one solid piece either in Western or Eastern cuisine, negating any need for further cutting.
- A lone chopstick can be used to pierce a larger snack food, such as baked/boiled corn, potatoes, etc.
- One does not even need to explain how handy it is to already have sticks, when need arises, while forks are just forks. The only need for a fork arises when it's a mealtime.

Some popular counter-arguments I will refute.
- Chopsticks are outdated --- One should not have to explain how subjective this view is.
- I don't know why (Asian) people still use chopsticks when they have access to forks, which was introduced to them a long time ago --- This is also a subjective view, with an added flavor of snobbiness or arrogance. While the word "still" implies the person thinks chopsticks and Asian traditions are outdated, this argument hints that the he or she also thinks Asians have to ditch their thousands year old traditions when presented with Western culture he or she thinks superior.
- Forks are easier to learn --- while this statement is as true as a statement can be, it does not hold a place in this argument. Most people that learn to use chopsticks learn it when young the time at which they have a lot of spare time anyway. Also, once one learns to use chopsticks, this "drawback" is no longer in effect. In other words, it doesn't matter how hard something is to learn, once you learn it. A better argument would be "chopsticks are harder to use" not learn. However, if chopsticks were much harder to use, the use of them would have faded away a long time ago or once forks were introduced to the countries that use chopsticks.
NewCreature

Con

Hi, I would like to first say that I always use chopsticks when I eat at legit asian restaurants, especially sushi. I have nothing against chopsticks, and I think both chopsticks and forks have their advantages and disadvantages, but I do disagree with Pro's position because I beleive forks are overall better than chopsticks.

Rebuttals to Pro's arguments for chopsticks.

"They allow for a more precise manipulation of food"

I completely disagree. But I would like for Pro to first give an example of this claim.


"A frequent user can use chopsticks to pick up food at once at least as much as one can with a fork"

This does not demonstrate that chopsticks are superior to forks at all. A frequent chopstick user is as good as an 8 year old fork user.


"They are easier to produce, maintain and dispose"

I agree. This is one of the few advantages that chopsticks have over forks. But we have is it enough to overcome the superiority of forks when it comes to functionality? I don't think so.

"Believe it or not, chopsticks can be used to cut (or split) some food, which is hard with a lone fork. "

I believe it, I've done it. I've also done it with a lone fork, and it's way easier. Try cutting thick piece of pork or beef with chopsticks and tell me that its not easier with a fork.

"A lone chopstick can be used to pierce a larger snack food, such as baked/boiled corn, potatoes, etc."

So can a lone fork. Again, this does not show that chopsticks are better, only that they are adequate.


"One does not even need to explain how handy it is to already have sticks, when need arises, while forks are just forks. The only need for a fork arises when it's a mealtime."

What other needs arise that requires chopsticks? Forks can be used for plenty of other things, which I will discuss later on.


My arguments on why forks are superior to chopsticks

1. Forks are easier to learn - This is the only one that I'll be using from the ones that you mentioned. This is a legitimate argument for forks' superiority. A person who used chopsticks all his/her life can transition to using forks way easier than a person who is transitioning from using forks to chopsticks. Forks are also easier to use with either hand. Most chopstick users can only use chopsticks with one hand.

2. Anything chopsticks can do, forks can do, most of the time better - There is nothing that chopsticks can do that forks can not, when it comes manipulating food, which is their primary function.

3. There are things that forks can do that chopsticks can not (efficiently or at all)
a. Chopsticks can not be efficiently used when it comes to eating steaks. Especially since you most likely have to use your off hand and use your dominant hand to cut with the knife.
b. Forks can keep holding food even when you let go of the fork. The fork's spikes can keep food attached to the fork even when you let go of the fork. Not possible with chopsticks.
c. Forks are more practical and efficient when it comes to eating cakes.
d. If you have only a fork or chopsticks as your options to eat ice cream (not melted) a fork would be the better option.

4. It perforates plastic easier (like for those tv dinners)

5. Eating small bits of food like corn or peas is way easier with fork since you can use still kinda scoop them. With chopsticks your are forced to eat them one pea at at time.


So overall, forks are definitely the superior eating utensil over chopsticks.


Debate Round No. 1
jujeahyun111

Pro

While you refute my arguments by stating that those arguments do not have a place here because proving that chopsticks are no worse than forks do not mean they are better, you contradict yourself by repeatedly saying that forks can do anything chopsticks can, which is equivalent of those arguments that you tried to refute.
I was simply making claims that while chopsticks are superior to forks in some areas, they are no worse than forks in other areas, making chopsticks superior overall. They were had place in my arguments. You will want to go over those arguments over again.

They allow for more precise manipulation of food - A frequent user of chopsticks may use chopsticks to fold a lengthy piece of food and then pick it up, in a blink of an eye (not really, but you can do it as if you were doing it with your own hands, only you are using one hand). Folding foods is more troublesome when attempted with forks. When eating a cuisine with a lot of broth and pieces of foods floating in it, a fork user will have hard time picking up the floating pieces. One will have to move the pieces to the sides of pot/bowl and then use the side to skewer the piece (You can try to scoop it up, but this makes it very likely for you to drop the piece of food, as the food is just sitting on the fork). A chopstick user will simply pick it up. If you are eating out of a bowl that is full of food and want one piece of food sitting on top, you have no choice but to skewer the food below it as well, bringing in other less wanted pieces of food. A chopstick can be used to pick up individual pieces of food or many pieces of food at once, depending on how you want to eat it.



"They are easier to produce, maintain and dispose [...] I don't think so.

You need to have demonstrated that forks are superior first, before you made a statement that pros outweigh cons. To me, this is just "one of many pros" of using chopsticks, not "one pro in a pool of cons" as you look at it.


"Believe it or not [...] that its not easier with a fork.

A piece of meat that chopsticks have hard time piercing and splittng will be even harder to cut with a fork. When piercing with a chopstick, the surface area is very small compared to when you press down with the side of a fork.

Rebuttals to Con arguments of chopsticks:
c1.a. I stated that the fact that something is easier to learn is not relevant. Once one learns to do something, it does not matter how easy it was to learn, but how efficient and useful it is. Granted, one of the reasons why guns were deemed superior to bows and arrows was that guns were faster to learn (I am not talking about modern day rifles, which are obviously better. I a talking about the first muskets). However, this was only superior from standpoint of the governments, as they needed to raise large armies quickly. Muskets were slow loading and a skilled bowman could shoot three to four arrows in the same time it took a skilled musketeer to load and fire one round, and at a much longer range. Obviously, the superiority of bows and arrows on battlefields is not affected by the fact that they are harder to master, just as the longer time taken to learn to use chopsticks should not matter when judging it as a eating utensil.
c1.b. I will agree that it is hard to use chopsticks with left hand. However, there is no reason to ever use chopsticks with left hand, so this argument does not hold.
c1.c. You may think, "then, the manufacturabilty and recyclabilities, etc, should not matter. Well, while learning to use chopsticks happens only once in a person's life time, using up and having to deal with waste is a constant process, and thusly, it is way more relevant than how easy they are to learn.

c2. You need to state some evidences or examples. My argument is that chopsticks do manipulate food better. For example, it would take way longer to pick up a grain of rice or pick out an individual pea with a fork. Also, since forks are skewering utensil, it is near impossible to pick up food without damaging it, which makes it mal-suited for eating fragile foods such as sushi. One can try to scoop up said food, but it will still take longer and/or need assistance of the other hand.

c3.a. I agree. However, I trained myself enough that when I eat steak or any food that needs an extra cutting tool, I use my left hand(I am right handed) to hold the said cutting tool. It is not something that is impossible. Also, the reason that chopsticks are not used in conjunction with knives is due more to the ages old traditions, not the matters of efficiency. It is in fact possible to hold food down with chopsticks with one's off-hand and cut it using a knife with the dominant hand, however, this is hard to imagine, as people do not use chopsticks this way, or as it is sometimes considered rude or uncivillized to eat like this. When pieces of foods are too big, chopsticks are usually used with a pair of scissors to cut foods. One will hold up the large piece of food with chopsticks while cutting the lower section of food with scissors. Forks cannot really do a good job of hold foods mid-air for cutting, as the heavier pieces of food will often slip off of the fork or one has to maneuver around pieces of food so large to even pick it up in the first place.
c3.b. When one skewers pieces of food with a chopstick, it will stay on the chopstick. However, people do not do this as this is not the primary function of chopsticks and is considered a bad manner. This does not mean chopsticks do not have the functionality.
c3.c. Again, this is only a common misbelief, because people usually do not associate Western foods or desserts with chopsticks. However, chopsticks, depending on their thickness, can actually be used to a surprising efficiency when one uses them to eat cakes or other dessert foods. Older Korean chopsticks madeof metal will be mal-suited for eating cake, as they are quite thin. However, the newer thicker, hollowed out metal chopsticks and other thicker wooden chopsticks have sufficient surface area which prevents the chopsticks from cutting right through the cake when a pick-up is attempted. In fact, it is actually possible to pickup larger pieces of cake with a pair of chopsticks than with a modestly sized fork (larger portion of chopsticks can be used for picking up food). However, this is not a primary 'grabbing' functionality of chopsticks, but rather a 'scooping.'
c3.d. Granted, it is still possible to eat icecream quite efficiently with chopsticks, using the method described above.

c4. I could not understand what you meant.

c5. Using the previously mentioned scooping method, one can expect to pick up 6 ~ 9 pieces of corn/pea. A frequent user of chopsticks is never forced to pick up a single piece of anything. It would be redudant to again bring up chopsticks can pick up individual pieces of corn or pea without assistance of other hand or tilting of plate.


On "other needs" --- While this does not have much to do with the eating functionality of chopsticks, I can name several possible other needs. For one, when you need to reach hard to reach areas but have no access to thongs or tweezers, chopsticks can be used in certain situations, while a fork's wider profile prevents it from being used in situations where chopsticks can be used. One would often use disposable chopsticks to pick up somethings that he or she does not want to touch, while the individual will less frequently think to use forks (changing diapers, picking up dead bugs). One less serious example would be when the characters from the sitcom "Friends" made a long pokey stick out of chopsticks to poke a neighbor across from their window. While chopsticks are eating utensils, they are also, just sticks. So they can be used in any situations that a stick will be useful in. Do not take this argument as seriously as other parts, however.

Overall, chopsticks are superior.
NewCreature

Con

"While you refute my arguments by stating that those arguments do not have a place here because proving that chopsticks are no worse than forks do not mean they are better, you contradict yourself by repeatedly saying that forks can do anything chopsticks can, which is equivalent of those arguments that you tried to refute."

No I didn't because I didn't stop there. The argument is that a fork can do anything that chopsticks can do, while chopsticks can't do everything a fork can do. You only gave examples of things that both a fork and chopsticks can do. That does not prove your claim that chopsticks are superior to a fork.


Folding food
I agree with you on this one. I eat a lot of kkbq and chopsticks are the way to go when it comes to eating rice paper and brisket.

But you don't have to fold it at all. For example, you can just use your fork to eat the meat and then eat the rice paper. Putting the meat inside the rice paper and putting it all in your mouth at once is a matter of preference.


Picking up floating pieces
This depends on the food, and a person's skill level on both untensils. Ill leave this one to the voters.

Picking up a piece of food on top of a bowl of food
It can be easily done by scooping it up with a fork.


"You need to have demonstrated that forks are superior first, before you made a statement that pros outweigh cons. To me, this is just "one of many pros" of using chopsticks, not "one pro in a pool of cons" as you look at it."

Yes this is what we are debating about. That was an introductory claim not an argument. You don't need to rebutt that.


"A piece of meat that chopsticks have hard time piercing and splittng will be even harder to cut with a fork. When piercing with a chopstick, the surface area is very small compared to when you press down with the side of a fork."

Not at all. I cut beef and pork with a fork all the time with ease. This would be nearly impossible with chopsticks. Also a fork's spikes can perforate and make it even easier to cut the piece of meat.

Rebuttals to your rebuttals

C1A. Learning curve is relevant because then someone who devotes himself to masterfully use a hook lets say, to manipulate food can claim that his hook is the best untensil, but you have to master it like he did. The fact that it's much easier to learn how to use a fork

C1B. An injury to your dominant hand would be a reason to have to use chopsticks with your off hand. My example was also when having to use a knife to cut a really tough piece of meat. Most poeple use their dominant hand to cut it for precision and strenght, while holding it down with their left hand with a fork, this would be very difficult with chopsticks.

C1C. Cars are harder to maufacture and recycle than a horse and carriage as well. Does this mean that a horse and carriage is a superior form of transportation? We are debating over which untensil the superior eating tool, so this argument is irrelevant.

C2. I mentioned that forks can be used to scoop up pieces of corn, peas etc. while you to pick them up one at a time with chopsticks. If I were to eat a bowl of corn or peas, I'd definitely choose a fork over chopsticks.

C3A. I never said that it was impossible. The point is that it is more difficult.
If you're adding scissors to your chopsticks then I can add whatever I want to my fork. Forks aren't meant to be used by itself in the first place. If I add a spoon or knife to my fork, then it's really superior to chopsticks and another tool.

C3B. Skewer with a chopstick is not done (though possible) because it's not practical. It's like skewering with a spoon. My point remains though that forks have the ability to skewer a piece of food and not exert any more effort to keep it on the utensil.

C3C and D. Again, possible but harder and less efficient.

C4. TV dinners often requires you to perforate the plastic covering before putting it in the microwave. This can be done with chopsticks as well I suppose but It's still easier with a fork. And when it comes to frozen microwavable peas and corns etc, forks are the way to go.

C5. Again, If assistance with other hand or tool is allowed then forks are even more unbeatable.


Other needs

I actually listed a bunch of non-food related functions of a fork but I deleted it since they really are irrelevant. One of them is forks are FAR better weapons. Theres really no need to include this topic.

Overall, FFTW (forks for the win)




Debate Round No. 2
jujeahyun111

Pro

"No I didn't because I didn't stop there. The argument is that a fork can do anything that chopsticks can do, while chopsticks can't do everything a fork can do. You only gave examples of things that both a fork and chopsticks can do. That does not prove your claim that chopsticks are superior to a fork. "

I did not only give examples of things that both of them can do. (From Round 1)In addition to what chopsticks can do, I added things that they can do better, which are "precision manipulation of food at a higher degree," "easier producibility," "higher cleanibility," "more design potential," and "that they are better at cutting food without assistance from other hand." The things I mentioned as ties are "amount of food that can be picked up," "food piercing."
Please do read my arguments carefully, and pay attention to the comparative adjectives in my sentences.


Folding food
Folding food is not only used when you are eating rice paper. For example, let's say you are eating a salad. And let's say for the sake of argument, every lettice piece is too large to fit in your mouth at once. You attempt to eat them using a fork, you will get the dressing all over the sides of your mouth, but with a pair of chopsticks, you can just fold the lettice leaves into a smaller size and put them into your mouth without a mess. Or when you are eating a lengthy, thin piece of beef with a fork, you will need to cut it when eating with a fork, but with a pair of chopsticks, you can just fold it and eat it.
Of course it is a matter of preference if you want to get the dressing on you chicks or eat it cleanly. However, when it comes to judging how better a tool something is, the personal preference is irrelevant. A killer may prefer stabbing over shooting, but that does not mean a knife is superior to a gun. This is as relevant as it gets, it is about manipulation of food.



"Picking up floating pieces
This depends on the food, and a person's skill level on both untensils. Ill leave this one to the voters."

I can say the same thing about foks, when you told me about cutting steak. This depends on food, and a person's skill level on both utensils. This is just a bad argument. In fact, all of our previous argument depended on food, wouldn't you agree? You tried to tell me chopsticks are worse at eating steak, cake and icecream. I could have said, "well it depends on food and your skill, so it does not matter." Instead, I rebutted your arguments by stating that chopsticks can be used to eat those foods at least as well as, if not better than, with chopsticks, and how they can be used.
And the point I was making was that it requires less work to pick up a floating piece of food with chopsticks than with a fork, and it was a very solid and irrefuttable argument. You do not even have to be that skilled to do that with chopsticks, so the skill level is what is irrelevant here.


"Picking up a piece of food on top of a bowl of food
It can be easily done by scooping it up with a fork."

I mentioned scooping with a fork in the "picking up floating pieces" part. I just did not think I had to mention the same thing twice. I said that it increased the chance of you dropping the food. This is a very unstable use, and thusly, chopsticks perform better. Also, you have less control of what you pick up with a fork.



"Yes this is what we are debating about. That was an introductory claim not an argument. You don't need to rebutt that."

I was not rebutting it. I was focusing more on the following sentence.
"This is one of the few advantages that chopsticks have over forks. But we have is it enough to overcome the superiority of forks when it comes to functionality? I don't think so."
I was saying, this does not hold place before the argument any way. This is closer to conclusion, not thesis.



"Not at all. I cut beef and pork with a fork all the time with ease. This would be nearly impossible with chopsticks. Also a fork's spikes can perforate and make it even easier to cut the piece of meat."

As a user of chopsticks AND forks, I disagree. You need to press down really hard with a fork to cut through, for example, a pork chop. From time to time, I had to use both my hands, depending on the quality of the meat. However, since the nature of cutting using chopsticks is "splitting" it is almost always easier.

C1A. Let's say the same person takes longer to learn to use chopsticks. But he can use the chopsticks to do all the things he could never do with the hook, and there is nothing he can not do that he could do with the hook. Now, which is the better utensil? Learning curve is irrelevant. It is irrelevant especially when you consider learning chopsticks do not even take that long a time. It only takes a coordinated person couple of hours of practice, or a slow learning person only a month or two. I do not like to say "master" because they are forks and chopsticks, there is nothing to master. But mastering does not take that long either. Once you can use either utensil, mastering is just a matter of time. Even if someone takes a year to master something it is still only a tiny portion of life of a person. It is not like learning to play guitar or cello, learning curve is irrelevant.

C1B. That would be relevant if everyone had to go through "dominant hand amputation" at one point in his or her life. And it is not harder to do hold food down with chopsticks as you cut it. All you need is two anchor points, and chopsticks can provide it. And if the meat is so tough that you "have to" switch hands(people do so, not because it is not possible, but because they find it more convenient to cut with right hand), may be you shouldn't be eating that.

C1C. I should have been clearer. I was saying it was more relevant than the learning curve. I was agreeing it is less relevant than the functionalities.

C2. I did address this in C3.C. of Round 2.

C3A. The only reason I decided to add a scenario where you will be using scissors, was because you were already including the use of knife. You cannot give yourself and your opponent different sets of rules. And adding spoon will add the same number of advantages to both chopsticks and forks.

C3B. It is nothing like skewering with a spoon. They have totally different contact area, and you do not need additional effort, unless the food is very slippery and you are using a metal chopstick which is only used in Korea anyway.

C3C. D. I said chopsticks can be used to eat those things at the same or higher efficiency, and I stated how, they will be and are used. Do not just say things, prove them. When I make a statement, I always try to support with an evidence, but you do not seem to be making the same effort. Include evidences, or your words carry no weight. Say why they are inefficient.

C4. TV dinners only need one hole on each section, and they usually have three to four sections. This means it requires three to four stabs, regardless of which utensil you use. So a fork has no advantage over a chopstick here.
However....

Above Korean Cup ramen requires you to punch in three holes on the cover to drain water (you can see the three pre-perforated white round spots at the top). This cannot be achieved with a fork at all(unless the fork is damaged and has only one prong) without damaging the rest of paper cover.
Do not say this is irrelevant, you brought it up.

C5. Prove it, you cannot just say something and expect your opponent to accept it. A pair of chopsticks perform better than a lone fork as I proved. You almost never need assistance from the other hand when using chopsticks. Obviously, you do need that when using a fork (knife to cut, spoon for scooping). In all cases where you may need to switch to a spoon from chopsticks (when there is too much broth or when you are eating soup), you need to switch to spoon from fork as well, so fork does not necessarily perform better with a spoon.




CW - Chopsticks win! (See what I did there? I don't even need "for the" part, because it is so obvious)
NewCreature

Con

"precision manipulation of food at a higher degree (overall)" was an unsubstantiated claim, and I'll argue that the claim is till unsbustantiated.

"easier productibility, higher cleanibility, and more design potential" are all irrelevant to the debate on what's the better eating untensil.

"better at cutting food without assistance from other hand" I simply disagree and will leave it to the voters.

My point still stands. Arguing that it's possible for chopsticks to do what a fork can easily do, is not an argument for chopsticks' superiority. All it says it that chopsticks are adequate.


Folding food
Like I already said, folding food, ie. rice paper, lettuce, long pieces of beef or anything else is a matter of preference. I never had to fold any of these foods. I eat yoshinoya beef bowl all the time with a fork with ease. Same goes with big pieces of lettuce. The point here is that, just because you can fold better with chopsticks (which I grant), it does not make it a better food utensil because you are never required to fold food, its a matter of preference. You can eat the same meal with a fork without folding and not lose any efficiency.

Picking up floating food
What I meant here was that chopsticks and forks are equal here, and it depends on the user. I don't accept your claim that it is difficult to pick up floating pieces of food with a fork at all. I've never had a problem with this using a fork.

The same can not be said about cutting steak. Forks are clearly the way to go when eating steak. Using chopsticks to eat ice cream, no matter your skill level is, is idiotic.

Picking up food on top of a bowl of food
Again this is a reversable claim. If you're as precise with a fork as you are with the chopsticks, then you should not have any issues with this task.


"I was saying, this does not hold place before the argument any way. This is closer to conclusion, not thesis."

An introductory claim is still not an argument, I was simply stating my initial position,


"As a user of chopsticks AND forks, I disagree. You need to press down really hard with a fork to cut through, for example, a pork chop. From time to time, I had to use both my hands, depending on the quality of the meat. However, since the nature of cutting using chopsticks is "splitting" it is almost always easier."

If something is hard for a fork to cut, then it's most like nearly impossible for chopsticks to do so. For example, steak. Good luck cutting a piece of well done steak with chopsticks. Fork overall is the better cutting untensil, especially if you limit chopsticks to traditional one hand use. They are no longer chopsticks when seperated, but even if you're allowed to, fork still wins this.


C1A My point was that anyone, if given enough time, can make anything very very effective. That would not be an even playing field then. I think we both agree that a hook is not a good eating utensil tool at all, unless you take the time and effort to make it so. This makes learning curve very relevant.

C1B The point still stands.

C1C Point remains that manufacturability and recyclablity is completely irrelevant to the debate unlike learning curve.


C2 Up to the voters. I stand by the fork when it comes to eating little pieces of food like rice, corn, peas. It doesn't require me to place my plate or bowl right in front of my mouth.

C3A I added the knife to both the fork and chopsticks. My point was that forks can be used as a substitute to chopsticks virtually in any scenerio without losing effieciecy and practicality while the same can be said if it's reversed. Fork and scissors = effective, Fork and knife = effective, Chopsticks and knife = not really. I will let the voters judge which is a the better untensil when both are complimented with any other tool.

C3B I never said that it's exactly like skewering with a spoon. What I'm trying to say is that chopsticks, though better than a spoon in the skewering department, is still inferior to a fork when it cmes to skewering. Out of the 3 (fork, chopsticks, spoon) it is only second place.

C3C &; D I thought this was pretty obvious, I will let the voters judge which is the better and more practical utensil for eating ice cream and cake.

C4 That korean ramen cover is irrelevant since it is tailor made for chopsticks. It actually doesn't help your case, since the manufacturers had to spend the extra money to add that feature.
Some TV dinners and frozen microwavable foods require you to perforate more than one hole. It tells you to make several perforactions actually. And again, the frozen ones like corn, and peas are just not practical at all to be peforated by chopsticks.

http://www.chefdoughty.com...



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


C5 fork and spoon, fork and knife.. do I even need to prove how efficient these combos are???

Eating a rice dish with spoon and fork is a breeze. You use the fork to guide the rice to you spoon, you use the fork to skewer the meat and veggies, you use both spoon and fork to cut pieces.

A steak meal is served with a fork and knife for obvious reasons.

A noodle soup with a fork and spoon is self explanatory as well.

I'll just leave this to the judges, You, however did not at all show that chopsticks with a compimentary tool is more efficient that a fork with the same help.


extra credit.
Forks can spread butter, jelly etc on bread more efficiently than chopstics.


Conclusion

Pro failed to show how chopsticks are actually superior to forks overall. I believe I made arguments that prove the opposite.



FTW - Fork the win! (see what I did there?)
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by jujeahyun111 5 years ago
jujeahyun111
ctrl+V
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
What exactly did you type to get that image there?
Posted by jujeahyun111 5 years ago
jujeahyun111
I used the rich text option.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Pro, how did you insert a picture into the debate?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dappleshade 5 years ago
dappleshade
jujeahyun111NewCreatureTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Entertaining debate. I think possibly the answer is, 'depends what you're eating'? Adding the picture of the foil with the holes designed for chopsticks was a losing move, and as Con pointed out, forks are easier to use. Maybe we should all switch to big fork-tweezers or something. Also, the disposability of chopsticks is not a argument in favour of them if you prefer to minimise waste.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
jujeahyun111NewCreatureTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Good job to both Pro and Con for pointing out the surprising number of different ways that both chopsticks as well as forks can be used. I am going with Con because he proved that while both are useful, most of the use for chopsticks is negated by the fact that few can use them. Forks are the other hand are easy enough for anyone to use.