Dance Is Not a Sport
Debate Rounds (2)
I value dance too highly to call it a sport.
Jake Vander Ark says the following about the difference between dance and sports:
"In sports, the objective is to win... tossing a toy back and forth to accomplish mindless objectives. ... In sports, winning is the endgame. players win so they can win so men can buy beer and congratulate each other for sitting in front of a TV, cheering on athletes... who provide meaningless entertainment that artificially heightens emotion. I can't think of anything lower. And dance is anything but low."
Calling dance something other than a sport does not degrade its difficulty or its value, it actually heightens it.
Yes, they are both physically demanding, but dance requires an acting ability and a storytelling aspect that is simply not present in sports.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by EndarkenedRationalist 2 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:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Seeing as how CON repeated his exact same case in each round, we can safely say PRO adequately defended her side of the debate. PRO essentially argues that dance is too "high" to be a sport and the objective isn't to win. Dancing also leaves room for interpretation rather than adhering to a set of rules. PRO thus sets up a few contentions with CON fails to negate, meaning PRO wins.
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.