The Instigator
Danielle
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
missbailey8
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Dinner Party Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Danielle
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 6/6/2016 Category: People
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 643 times Debate No: 92435
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

Danielle

Pro

Let's imagine that we are friendemies (a person with whom one is friendly despite a fundamental dislike or rivalry). Both of us have somehow acquired the ability to invite anyone from the following categories to attend our dinner parties, and anyone we invite will attend. We brag to each other about which of us can host the best gatherings, and I mention that it is the company we keep that account for the best get-togethers. You agree, and insist that over the next month, you will host the 4 most interesting dinner parties. Nay nay, I say. Indeed my guests over the next month will be the most fun and insightful; the mixed company I keep will undoubtedly make for the most profound evenings. Thus we decide to compete.

==

Rules

A. For our first dinner party, we are only allowed to invite any 5 people that are dead.
(They magically... come back to life for the evening, unscathed by the facets of death.)

B. For our second dinner party, we are allowed to invite 5 musicians/actors that are alive.

C. For our third dinner party, we must invite any 5 women, dead or alive.

D. For our last dinner party, we must invite any 5 living people that are not musicians/actors.

The goal is to host dinner parties that are awesome for whatever reason.

We will be responsible for explaining why they are awesome.

We should assume that the parties are hosted in the same type of environment around a dinner table. The food, music, and anything other than the guests (at this 2-6 hour dinner) are mostly irrelevant.

==

Round 1 is for acceptance.

In Round 2, I will select my A) guests first. You cannot choose the same people I do.

In Round 2, you will select your A) guests and your B) and C) guests.

In Round 3, I will select my B) and C) dinner guests; I cannot duplicate your choices.

I will also choose my D) dinner guests first.

In Round 3, you will choose your D) dinner guests.

In Round 4, I will start my arguments on why my 4 dinner party guest list is superior.

I will explain why each of my 4 parties trump yours. You will do the same in R4.

I will continue my arguments and conclude in R5; so will my opponent.

I hope this is a fun debate!
missbailey8

Con

I accept this debate! I look forward to a fun discussion.
Debate Round No. 1
Danielle

Pro

Thanks for accepting, missbailey8!

Per the debate rules, my first dinner party (A) with 5 dead people includes:

1. Jesus
2. Albert Einstein
3. Nikola Tesla
4. Guatama Buddha
5. Baruch Spinoza

I look forward to seeing your A, B and C guests. This should be fun.
missbailey8

Con

Here are my choices.

A. For our first dinner party, we are only allowed to invite any 5 people that are dead.
(They magically... come back to life for the evening, unscathed by the facets of death.)

1. George Carlin
2. Freddie Mercury
3. Charles Darwin
4. James Madison
5. Mahatma Gandhi

B. For our second dinner party, we are allowed to invite 5 musicians/actors that are alive.

1. Gerard Way
2. Brian May
3. Joseph Gordon Levitt
4. Neil Patrick Harris
5. Mary Lambert

C. For our third dinner party, we must invite any 5 women, dead or alive.

1. Janis Joplin
2. Joan of Arc
3. Marie Antoinette
4. Princess Diana
5. Julie Andrews

Thank you. I look forward to my opponent's choices. So long and goodnight!
Debate Round No. 2
Danielle

Pro

Dinner Party B

1. Ellen DeGeneres
2. Seth MacFarlane
3. Amy Schumer
4. Jimmy Fallon
5. Megan Fox

Dinner Party C

1. Cleopatra
2. Voltairine de Cleyre
3. Anne Boelyn
4. Marilyn Monroe
5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Dinner Party D

1. Stephen Hawking
2. Barack Obama
3. Elon Musk
4. Steven Pinker
5. Noam Chomsky

I look forward to your final guest list.
missbailey8

Con

D. For our last dinner party, we must invite any 5 living people that are not musicians/actors.

1. Quentin Tarantino
2. Malala Yousafzai
3. Bill Gates
4. Bill Nye
5. Neil deGrasse Tyson

Thank you. I look forward to my opponent's explanation of why her choices are superior to mine. So long and goodnight!
Debate Round No. 3
Danielle

Pro

Dinner Party A

1. Jesus
2. Albert Einstein
3. Nikola Tesla
4. Guatama Buddha
5. Baruch Spinoza

Jesus is undoubtedly the most influential person that has ever lived. Consider the fact that there are 33,000 denominations of Christianity alone. That's a lot of ways to interpret the teachings of one man! I would like to ask Jesus a lot of important questions, such as whether or not he is really God; what his ultimate message is; the purpose or meaning of life; what happens after we die; and his greatest advice among other things.

While Jesus has significantly influenced Western thought, Buddha is perhaps the biggest influence on Eastern philosophy and spirituality. I would love to learn more about Buddha's life and goals, as well as have him explain parts of his belief system in his own words. It would be interesting AF to compare the spiritual guidance of the Buddha with that of Jesus. I would ask them both if they were wrong, and if so, how. While I'm not religious, I would like to pray and meditate with Jesus and/or Buddha as well.

My dinner would also include Einstein and Tesla - two of the greatest thinkers in existence. Nikola Tesla was an inventor, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer, physicist, and futurist best known for his contributions to the design of the modern alternating current (AC) electricity supply system, light, radio, radar, X-Rays, remote controls, robotics, laser, wireless communication and more.

Between Tesla and Einstein, I could learn a ton about things in science and physics I don't have a full understanding of. I'd also like to show Tesla how far we've come since his inventions, and ask where he thinks we can/should go from here. Tesla was a "mad scientist" and creative genius.

Einstein had a significant impact on science, philosophy, mathematics, politics and history (think Atom bomb). His theory of relativity is one of the biggest contributions to science of all time. However, Tesla was a critic of Einstein's theory and the two of them had several disagreements. I would love to hear them hash it out! Meanwhile, other physicists interpreted relativity theory as a spiritual, idealistic view of the universe. They claim the laws of science have an a priori mental character and exist in a pure spiritual realm.

Speaking of science and spirituality, Baruch Spinoza is an underrated philosopher, in my opinion. By laying the groundwork for the 18th-century Enlightenment and modern biblical criticism, including modern conceptions of the self and the universe, he came to be considered one of the great rationalists of 17th-century philosophy. One of his popular advocacies was Pantheism: a doctrine that identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.

Fortunately, God might be at my dinner party to shed some light on this!

Nikola Tesla was raised Christian, but later showed a profound respect for Buddhism as well. He's said, "For ages this idea [that each of us is only part of a whole] has been proclaimed in the consummately wise teachings of religion, probably not alone as a means of insuring peace and harmony among men, but as a deeply founded truth. The Buddhist expresses it in one way, the Christian in another, but both say the same: We are all one." In a sense, Spinoza agrees! And since Einstein also identifies as a Pantheist, I can only imagine an incredible discussion between all 5 of them (plus me) would ensue beyond my wildest imagination.

Not only would the 4 mortals help me come up with amazing questions, but Jesus might be able to answer them all.


Dinner Party B

1. Ellen DeGeneres
2. Seth MacFarlane
3. Amy Schumer
4. Jimmy Fallon
5. Megan Fox

It's worth noting that my first 4 dinner guests are absolutely hysterical. All 4 of them star in their own TV shows. These characters bring a unique perspective and sense of humor to the dinner. For instance Amy Schumer is a huge feminist, and Ellen DeGeneres brings a female comedic voice as well. Ellen and Jimmy Fallon tend to have "cleaner" jokes, but Amy and Seth are pretty raunchy. This would be a nice balance along with the male/female dynamics.

Seth writes and stars in one of the funniest cartoons of all time: Family Guy. One of my favorite things to do is smoke bud and laugh along. Best of all, at this dinner I could smoke with Seth (and all the others!) in person. All of them have admitted to toking it up at some point which would be hilarious and really fun.

The last was a selfish add. Hehe. Megan Fox is, well, a fox and she's bisexual to boot. I would totally have a chance at hooking up with her. I doubt the others would mind - especially Ellen. We'd all be laughing, joking and having a good time. I'm sure the weed glow wouldn't hurt. Plus Megan Fox swears that there's more to her than meets the eye; she claims to be a really intelligent, deep thinker and whether or not that's true doesn't really matter.


Dinner Party C

1. Cleopatra
2. Voltairine de Cleyre
3. Anne Boelyn
4. Marilyn Monroe
5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Cleopatra was the last active pharaoh of the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt. She was beautiful, intelligent, charming and ambitious. Cleopatra challenged the patriarchal status quo, and was a very driven and powerful woman. She was incredibly ahead of her time in the feminist regard - unconventional and ruthless when she had to be. Given her place in history between the Egyptian and Roman empires, she is incredibly interesting and someone whose stories anyone would be fortunate to hear.

Voltairine de Cleyre was acclaimed by Emma Goldman as "the most gifted and brilliant anarchist woman America ever produced." She was a prolific writer and speaker, opposing the state, marriage, and the domination of religion over sexuality and women's lives. She is one of my favorite political authors whose ideology I hold in high esteem.

Anne Boleyn one of the most intriguing and inadvertently powerful women in history. When King Henry III tried to seduce her, she refused to become his mistress (unheard of at the time) and refused his advances for years. This compelled the King to seek an annulment from the Catholic Church so that he could marry Anne. However the Pope would not allow it, thus Henry fought tooth and nail and eventually broke from the Catholic church. The Church of England was formed subsequently. Anne Boleyn of modest looks was somehow able to compel a huge event in history that divided a nation - all because the king wanted her. She remains a huge mystery and fascinating figure; we only know she was intelligent, spirited and courageous.

RBG is one of the greatest female liberal minds of our time. I'm not liberal though - not even close. But there's no denying that she's absolutely brilliant as her law credentials show. She has been an incredibly impactful member on the Supreme Court, and I would love to pick her brain and learn from her experience. Interestingly, she was extremely friendly with one of the most conservative SCOTUS Justices, Mr. Scalia. The fact that she could be so open-minded (and out-spoken) would make her a great dinner guest. She's also Jewish and I'd love to ask her about some of her interesting beliefs on Judaism.

Now onto Marilyn. The thing is I'd like answers to some of America's big mysteries, such as how she died, the story behind her will, the FBI files that went missing, and most importantly - her connection to the Kennedys. I'm curious about the conspiracy theories, and I'd love the juicy gossip!


Dinner Party D


1. Stephen Hawking
2. Barack Obama
3. Elon Musk
4. Steven Pinker
5. Noam Chomsky

Stephen Hawking is arguably the smartest and most interesting person alive. In addition to his high IQ, he also has a creative mind with the imagination and foresight to draw mind blowing conclusions about the universe. He is a theoretical physicist and cosmologist who was able to expand on Einstein's theory of relativity into the field of quantum mechanics. It would be an honor and a privilege to have a conversation with him and ask him fundamental questions about existence, reality, black holes, time and space.

Barack Obama is the most powerful person in the world. He has insight and is privilege to information that few other people on the planet will ever have. Not only does he have the intelligence of a Harvard constitutional law professor, but he has the charisma, ambition, and inside knowledge of one of the hardest and most important jobs to ever be held. He would be able to answer my questions about the government and UFOs as well.

Elon Musk is considered the most profound innovator of our time. Combined with Hawking's input, I would like Musk to bounce ideas of what to do futuristically (and then Obama can tell us if it's politically realistic). For example Musk is currently investing in colonizing Mars. He is looking to get humans onto Mars within the next 10 years.

Steven Pinker is a cognitive scientist, psychologist, linguist, and popular science author. Pinker has been named as one of the world's most influential intellectuals by various magazines. Similarly, Noam Chomsky is a linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, logician, social critic, and political activist. Sometimes described as "the father of modern linguistics," Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy, and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. Pinker is also a major figure in cognitive science and studies language, specifically. The two of these men are brilliant and have insight to offer on matters of the brain. Compare this to Hawking's expertise on the universe in general.

Comparatively, Obama is a political figure and Noam Chomsky is a very big political philosopher. Thus the overlap between all of these men would make for a fascinating evening. Elon Musk is able to think outside the box and develop ideas and ventures to implement some of the innovation to possibly come out of the discussion with these men.
missbailey8

Con

A. Dinner Party

1. George Carlin
2. Freddie Mercury
3. Charles Darwin
4. James Madison
5. Mahatma Gandhi

First of all, George Carlin is, arguably, one of the best comedians to ever live. His raunchy humor would liven up any party. Also, he had an interesting social commentary, so it'd be fantastic to see how he'd see the world today, as he unfortunately passed away eight years ago. What would Carlin say about the world and it's advancements today? Well, in that dinner party we'd find out.

Now on to Freddie Mercury. According to many, he had a wide vocal range of over four octaves. He was arguably one of the best singers of all time. But what would Mr. Mercury think about the music industry today? How did he manage to have such a fantastic voice and stage presence? How did he still perform in Queen for years all while suffering from AIDS?! There's be some many things to ask the famous frontman of Queen.

Thirdly, we have Charles Darwin, the man who created the theory of evolution. This proves to be an influential theory, as it created a reasonable explanation for humans today and made a divided from Creationism. This makes Darwin one of the most important scientists to ever live. If he were to join this party, he would be able to provide tremendous insight on possibly the greatest debate ever: Evolution vs. Creationism.

James Madison is said to be the "Father of The Constitution", as he contributed the most to America's most famous document. It would be absolutely fantastic to gain his insight on our government today. Does Madison approve of the way we run America today? What can we do to improve? I'm almost certain that Madison would be the best person to ask.

Mahatma Gandhi led India's independence movement, but in a unique way; through peace. He never led any violent protests or harm to anyone, he only used his wits to be one of the best pacifists ever. Many of my questions towards him would involve how he feels about violent protests today, like Ferguson or Black Lives Matter. How does Gandhi believe we as Americans should go about protest?

B. Dinner Party

1. Gerard Way
2. Brian May
3. Joseph Gordon-Levitt
4. Neil Patrick Harris
5. Mary Lambert

Gerard Way is the frontman of former rock band My Chemical Romance. He has become an inspiration to many, due to his previous battle with alcohol and depression during the recording of his first two studio albums with the band. Today, he's one of the most iconic rock idols of the 21st century, despite his struggles of the past. Because of this, he's proven to be a very intriguing figure in music, as his slow climb to popularity was not easy.

Brian May is a guitarist and songwriter for the band Queen. He wrote several of Queen's most iconic songs, such as "The Show Must Go On", "Under Pressure", "White Queen", and "We Will Rock You". There are many things we can ask Brian May about, like his experience in Queen, how he, Roger Taylor, and John Deacon dealt with the death of aforementioned Freddie Mercury, and how he became such a virtuosic with the guitar.

Both actors, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Neil Patrick Harris are said to be so pleasant to be around in real life. Both of them are quite talented, hailing from such works as 500 Days of Summer and How I Met Your Mother respectively. It's said be a quite an experience to hang out with both, so having a party with them would certainly be an unforgettable experience.

Unfortunately, many don't know about Mary Lambert, who, in my opinion, is very underrated. Like Gerard Way, she struggled quite a bit to get where she is now, specifically with her sexuality, bipolar disorder, sexual abuse, and body image. Unlike Way though, she is considered a R&B, folk, and pop musician and has done spoken word poetry as well. She's also surprisingly upbeat, despite previous struggles. Having her at a dinner party would certainly be quite a lot of fun due to her bubbly personality.

C. Dinner Party

1. Janis Joplin
2. Joan of Arc
3. Marie Antoinette
4. Princess Diana
5. Julie Andrews

Janis Joplin is, undoubtedly, one of the most influential rock singers ever. In fact, to describe her, here's a quote from Stevie Nicks of Fleetwood Mac.

"Janis put herself out there completely, and her voice was not only strong and soulful, it was painfully and beautifully real. She sang in the great tradition of the rhythm & blues singers that were her heroes, but she brought her own dangerous, sexy rock & roll edge to every single song. She really gave you a piece of her heart. And that inspired me to find my own voice and my own style."

What would Joplin think about music today? How did she achieve her unique style? These questions and more could be answered.

Joan of Arc was instrumental in The Hundred Years War. At a young age, she aided the French in capturing Orleans, Rheims, Paris, are numerous other towns to aid France in freeing itself from the English. She also was made a saint in 1920. Because of this, she is one of the most important women in history. But I'd like to know more about her interesting visions that led her to fight for the French and what her experience in combat was like.

Marie Antoinette and her husband King Louis XVI lived a life of luxury and resembled everything wrong with the monarchy. In fact, many people started to say she was a cold, villainous woman, while others claim she was sweet and misunderstood. But which of these most resemble the notorious queen? What did she think of these rumors? These are both questions that can be answered, if only this dinner party were to happen.

Princess Diana of Wales was said to be a charismatic woman and she used her image as princess for good, as she was committed to charity work. This is seen to be a polar opposite of Marie Antoinette, who, like I said before, was believed to be incredibly selfish and cruel. This was were to be true, how would Marie Antoinette and Princess Diana interact? How would royalty differ from one time to another?

Julie Andrews is a famous singer and actor, starring in movies such as The Sound of Music and Mary Poppins. Even though she has seemingly lost her singing voice due to an ill fated throat surgery, she still acts and is said to be an overall pleasant person to be around. She would bring a sort of light to this dinner party due to her lovely personality.

D. Dinner Party

1. Quentin Tarantino
2. Malala Yousafzai
3. Bill Gates
4. Bill Nye
5. Neil deGrasse Tyson

Quentin Tarantino is probably one of the most influential directors ever. His work has inspired many, with his tales of gritty violence, fantastic dialogue, a gripping story, and fleshed out characters. Imagine what he could teach about his craft at this party! How does he do it? What established his passion?

As of today, Malala Yousafzai is the youngest Nobel Prize laureate, after she campaigned for universal education so men and women alike could go to school everywhere. In fact, she was incredibly humble about winning the Nobel Prize.

"'If I win Nobel Peace Prize, it would be a great opportunity for me, but if I don't get it, it's not important because my goal is not to get Nobel Peace Prize, my goal is to get peace and my goal is to see the education of every child,' she said."

At only 15, after being shot in the head, she still fought for the rights for girls to go to school in her home country of Pakistan. She is undoubtedly an influential figure in activism for equal rights in terms of education. What can we learn from Malala?

Bill Gates is the founder of both Microsoft and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, both of which are incredibly influential to society today. He brought the once bulky and awkward computers into the home for personal use. With the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he is promoting global health and development, which is helping thousands of people. Undoubtedly, Bill Gates is one of the most important people of the 21st century, making him a great person to ask about entrepreneurship and business development, among other things.

Both Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson have brought science to the masses through Bill Nye the Science Guy and Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey respectively. They're practically pioneers of edutainment and can provide much interesting scientific discussion in this dinner party.

Thank you. I look forward to my opponent's explanation of why her choices are better than mine. So long and goodnight!
Debate Round No. 4
Danielle

Pro

Dinner Party A

There's no doubt that George Carlin is hilarious, and Freddie Mercury is one of my favorite musicians of all time. Gandhi and Darwin are also some of the most influential thinkers in history. However Con's Dinner Party A (DPA) seems erratic and/or dull. While Darwin made some huge contributions to science, what would James Madison have to say about it? James Madison was a Founding Father who can provide historical insight on the inception of our government. However there doesn't seem to be anything cohesive about this dinner. The guests don't seem to have much in common. Further, because there is not much linking everyone in attendance, we have no idea what type of conversation to expect. If we're asking Freddie Mercury about the music industry of the 1980s, I'm not sure where Gandhi is supposed to fit into this discussion.

Meanwhile, I explained how my DPA would be incredibly insightful. I've included both spiritual and scientific thinkers, so we can compare and contrast various theories and ideas. Best of all, I explained the really cool link between the people I invited (such as an atheist / Buddhist / pantheist philosopher Spinoza along with Jesus and Buddha himself - not to mention Einstein who had tremendous ideas about the universe that Spinoza valued as "God."

My dinner would be kick a$s because it would shed light on some of the most important questions of all time, including the meaning of life and the very nature of God. Meanwhile, Con's DPA only contains some random albeit interesting attendees.

Tesla's attendance at my dinner could provide some ideas about where technology can/should go from here. He was arguably the most innovative person of all time, and his imagination coupled with today's technology, scientific advancements and know-how could be incredible. However I'd also like Jesus and Buddha to offer their spiritual advice on how technology should be used and why.

Dinner Party B

Con has chosen to invite Gerard Way, the lead singer of "My Chemical Romance" to her DPB. If you don't know who that is, don't worry -- My Chemical Romance is a really bad emo band that (fortunately) fell off the face of the mainstream earth about 10 years ago. Unlike Queen, they did not leave much of a musical legacy and neither has Gerard Way. I bet most of the audience hasn't heard of him, and Con has not done a good job of explaining why his attendance would be so impactful at any dinner party.

Con's other guests are Neil Patrick Harris and Joseph Gordon Levitt - two celebrities that I really like. I agree with Con that they are probably very happy, fun and upbeat people. That's why I'm not sure why Con would make them suffer through a dinner party with the likes of Gerard Way, who's penned songs with titles like "I'm Not Okay" and often sings or screams about how crappy his life is.

I've never heard of Mary Lambert, but she is apparently a young lesbian singer. I'm not sure what she would have in common with Joseph Gordon Levitt or Brian May. In fact Brian May is much older than the rest of Con's DPB. I'm not sure why this dinner would be any fun at all. On the other hand, I have the funniest comedians of today invited to my DPB.

My DPB not only contains hilarious comedians, but both Jimmy Fallon and Seth Macfarlane are musicians. In fact Seth is a classically trained jazz musician. That means not only would my dinner party be hysterical, but I would have musical entertainment and constant jokes all night.

Dinner Party C

Con is curious about what Janis Joplin thinks of music today. While I'm a Joplin fan, I couldn't care less what her opinion would be of music today and I'm not sure why Con does either. Janis Joplin is just one musician out of millions throughout history who have made a significant impact on music... yet Joplin hasn't had a HUGE impact, and her subjective opinion is not gospel.

I'm also not sure what Janis Joplin would have in common with Joan of Arc or Marie Antoinette. While both of those women are fascinating, their lives and lifestyle were entirely different than Janis' lifestyle. Perhaps Princess Diana could relate to the historical Frenchwomen better than Janis, but I also fail to see how Julie Andrews fits in.

Julie Andrews is an old, mediocre actress who is known for her class and charm. How would this dinner be particularly interesting or fun? Con hasn't thoroughly explained. However I've argued how my DPC would be incredibly insightful. Not only would Marilyn Monroe be able to answer questions surrounding the mystery of her death (cool!), but my DPC would provide so many feminist political perspectives throughout history.

My DPC has guests that have made a huge impact on government and world history. While Joan of Arc (and arguably Marie Antoinette) did also, I'm not sure how Con's DPC guests would relate to each other. My guest Cleopatra would be able to talk about her time ruling over an entire empire, and compare this to RBG whose status on the Supreme Court has allowed her to influence a significant amount of law in the "American empire." I would also like to compare Voltairine de Cleyre's positions of anti-statism with RBG who is an agent of the state. Because RBG has demonstrated to be open minded and able to engage with people of differing ideologies, this would make for a fascinating discussion.

Anne Boelyn's character, spirit and intelligence would add another courageous female voice to the conversation.

All of the females at my dinner party are brilliant political minds with an important historical legacy. But Con's DPC seems like it would be a bunch of women with nothing in common.

Dinner Party D

Once again, Con's last dinner party seems like a mish mosh of random guests. Quentin Tarantino is cool, but he's kind of an oddball and has a reputation for being a little bit of a d!ck. I'm not sure what he would have in common or to discuss with Malala Yousafzai or the likes of Bill Gates. While Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson might like to discuss science together, I'm not sure where the rest of the group fits in with the conversation.

However my DPD has a range of guests that all have things to talk about. As I mentioned, combined with Hawking's input, I would like Musk to bounce ideas of what to do futuristically (and then Obama can tell us if it's politically realistic). This combines the expertise of all 3 individuals. Furthermore, Pinker, Obama and Chomsky are all political minds - especially the latter two. It would be fascinating to hear Pinker and Chomsky discuss the fabric of US as individuals, as in cognitively what makes us who we are and what shapes our ideas. Then I'd like to see Chomsky and Obama talk politics and putting these ideas to action... and then see Musk and Hawking talk science of the future, and how it will impact society. While Hawking focuses more on theoretical and super far out scientific concepts, Musk concerns himself with using science to further the greater good and good of humanity. This is another way both of the scientists and Obama can contribute to the conversation.

Conclusion

My DPA has a range of spiritual and scientific thinkers. These are some of the most important and significant people of all time, that can answer questions and provide insight that NOBODY on Con's guest list can come close to providing. Once again, my DPA can provide enlightening answers to the most fundamental questions about God, the nature of our universe and the meaning of life. We would gain insight on both western and eastern philosophy, as well as have access to the most 2 prolific scientists that have ever lived.

My DPB would be absolutely hilarious and provide both musical and comedic entertainment. Con's DPB = random B, C and D list celebrities that a lot of people don't know or care about. While that alone doesn't necessarily make them lame, well, this dinner party of Con's seems very lame. I'm not sure what these people are supposed to offer or have in common. The same goes for Con's DPC while the theme of my dinner is feminist philosophers and political activists/leaders.

My DPD is full of some brilliant minds, wheras Con's DPD looks for name recognition. Everyone knows Bill Nye but his impact on science is incredibly limited. He is known for popularizing basic science for children -- not exactly a huge accomplishment. He hasn't made any significant contributions and we have no reason to assume he would speak with brilliant insight. Similarly, while Malala Yousafzai has demonstrated incredibly courage and bravery, I'm not sure what insight she would add to the conversation. While of course learning about her experinces and observation would be interesting, compare that to my guest Obama who has access to some of the world's most top secret information.

Plus, Malala Yousafzai's contributions to society have been political; it's amazing that she fights for the educational rights of young women. However beyond that, her expertise is limited. I'm not sure what she would discuss with Bill Gates, who is far more of a philanthropost than involved in politics.

==

Every single one of my dinner parties centers around a theme, and has guests that provide a lot of entertainment or knowledge. All of the dinner parties I host have really interesting people who have made significant contributions to both the past, present and future day. None of my dinner parties seem scattered, random or incohesive. They would also provide a great deal of useful feedback by featuring some of the most significant people that have ever lived. I have included thinkers and entertainers from all walks of life and point in history with different insight to offer. Yet despite their differences, my dinner parties have guests that would get along or have things to talk about with each other in a way that allows the evening to carry on without a bunch of randomness.

==

That said, I'd like to thank missbailey8 for participating in this experimental debate with me.

It's been fun!

missbailey8

Con

Dinner Party A.

1. Jesus
2. Albert Einstein
3. Nikola Tesla
4. Guatama Buddha
5. Baruch Spinoza

I'd first like to propose that we haven't proven Jesus's existence as of yet. Assuming He doesn't exist, then how would my opponent be able to invite Him to the dinner party? This that, they whole proposed discussion would fall apart, as the scenario my opponent suggested as Jesus as an integral part of this conversation. Even my opponent admits in her very argument that she isn't religious, implying that she *doesn't* believe in Jesus, so she must be aware of the evidence against Jesus's existence.

In regards to all of the choices my opponent made, they seem to mesh too perfectly, if that makes sense. She has one set conversation for them to go off of, while my DPA can branch off in multiple ways. The five clashing personalities make it so much more rewarding.

Think about it; can you imagine a conversation between a cynical comedian, a flamboyant frontman of one of the most influential bands of all time, a questioner of faith and the bringer of answers towards how we actually became humans, the father of The Constitution (the document that outlines our government), and a peaceful protestor who lead India to independence from Britain?

Though this is a common complaint I have about all of my opponent's choices except maybe DPC, I feel it's especially clear here.

Dinner Party B.

1. Ellen DeGeneres
2. Seth MacFarlane
3. Amy Schumer
4. Jimmy Fallon
5. Megan Fox

Okay, my opponent may be getting somewhere with her first four choices, but she never really explains why they're funny. What is it about their humor that makes them worthy of this dinner party? At least with my explanation for George Carlin I explained why he'd be invited to my dinner party. (His interesting social commentary, mainly.) Her most basic reasons for invited these four is that they're funny for unspecified reasons and she could smoke with them.

Granted, she does give a extra explanation for Ellen and Any, but it isn't really a strong one. It really boils down to "because they're women". Sure, that's a place to start, but just because they're women doesn't mean that they're worthy of an invitation. It'd be another thing if she explained why they're funny, but she doesn't.

My opponent's last person, Megan Fox, is only reason brought in for a selfish personal gain. I mean, Ellen's a lesbian. Granted, she's married, but my opponent easily could've just left out Megan Fox and substitute her for a better choice. My opponent also claims that Megan Fox claims that she's intelligent and a deep thinker. The key word in that statement is "claims". We have no proof of this, other than what Megan claims about herself. But then again, my opponent goes back on this argument saying that it doesn't matter if it's true or not. So again, she just proposed invited her so she could possibly have sex with her.

Dinner Party C.

1. Cleopatra
2. Voltairine de Cleyre
3. Anne Boelyn
4. Marilyn Monroe
5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Though these all are intriguing choices, I'd like to point out some hypocrisy from my opponent. Like I'll explain later, in her rebuttals of my choices, she says that my choices were seemingly random. This dinner party isn't any different! Exactly what conversation would these women have? How do they connect? Well, she never explains. Yes, I did do this too, but she makes such a big point against me for it in her defense that it couldn't be ignored.

Dinner Party D.

1. Stephen Hawking
2. Barack Obama
3. Elon Musk
4. Steven Pinker
5. Noam Chomsky

I'll admit, I concede to this dinner party. I can't really find too much fault with it except for maybe what I said in regards to DPA and how the personalities mesh. These are, by far, my opponent's best dinner party choices.

~

In response to my opponent's rebuttals against my choices, she says that most of my choices were random and scattered, but that's the point. You wouldn't know how the conversation would go, especially with all of the conflicting personalities present.

Take my choices for Dinner Party B. for example. (Coincidentally the one she seemed to agree with the least.) You have no idea how a conversation between a former rock frontman, two upbeat male actors, a guitarist for one of the most successful bands of all time, and a spoken word poet/ R&B singer would go. In my opponent's Dinner Party B., you have a good idea of exactly how the night will go. There will be plenty of laughs, maybe some music provided by Seth MacFarlane, and Pro might hook up with Megan Fox. That's it. With my examples, there are some many ways the conversation could go due to the multiple clashing personalities making it, in my opinion, more entertaining to observe.

Even though I disagree profusely with some of the broad generalizations my opponent made about some of my choices, (mostly with Gerard Way, to be honest. I'd be likely to make a whole Google Document discussing this alone.) I won't go into them due to lack of sufficient character space to go into a rant and for the sake of fairness.

I'd like to thank Danielle for participating in this debate with me. So long and goodnight!
Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Udel// Mod action: NOT Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: comment section rfd

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voter explains their decision sufficiently, analyzing the arguments given by each side in the debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by missbailey8 11 months ago
missbailey8
@yomama12

No, I'm sure that neither of us forgot to put Johnny Depp.
Posted by yomama12 11 months ago
yomama12
For #2, you forgot to add Johny Depp as one of them...
Posted by Udel 11 months ago
Udel
R03;RFD......Pro does a great job of explaining why her first dinner party would be awesome, but then Con says we don't even know if Jesus exists which means 1 less guest could be at Pro's party and it would be less awesome. Jesus was one of the best reasons for her guests, R03;so I think Con did an excellent job negating Pro's dinner when Pro's dinner was amazing. I'm not sure if I agree with Con that it's "too perfect" but Con did a great job of defending against's Danielle's criticism that her guests are too diverse. Con says that means her dinner conversation is up for anything. As amazing as Danielle's dinner was I still think it is a tie at this point. For dinner party B I disagree with Con that Danielle did not explain why her guests are funny, because Danielle did explain that some were raunchy, had different styles of humor, etc. and Danielle including Megan Fox was a bit humorous herself. So Danielle has the slight lead. I also agree with Danielle's points that Con's dinner party C has some boring people with not much in common. But Con says Danielle doesn't explain what her guests links are and that is really untrue. Pro explains that all of her guests at C are political activists and feminists. She also explained the conversation she expected between them like an an anti-statist arguing with an agent of the state (ruth badger ginsbeg) so Con is just lying here or something. Now Con is also right in admitting that Pro's dinner party D is just awesome and so I think Con exhibited really polite, awesome conduct that I respect. According to DDOs rules, conduct points "should be awarded for issues of debate etiquette and of fairness and civility." I think Con showed great etiquette and civility throughout. But it won't let me award conduct points!!!!!! Sorry COn.
Posted by dsjpk5 11 months ago
dsjpk5
Very interesting debate, but I don't know how anyone could offer a sufficient rfd
Posted by tejretics 11 months ago
tejretics
Yeah, these are some awesome names.

I definitely agree with Obama, Chomsky and Malala Yousafzai.
Posted by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
Yay Dannielle
Posted by ThinkBig 11 months ago
ThinkBig
@Danielle, I laughed way too hard at that comment.
Posted by Danielle 11 months ago
Danielle
@Wylted -- Ann Coulter would be in my brothel as well. We would make a snuff film.
Posted by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
I like Xena warrior princess, but would feel guilty stealing lesbians for my brothel.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Udel 11 months ago
Udel
Daniellemissbailey8
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: comment section rfd