Is Loki Truly Evil?
Debate Rounds (4)
1. No bad language, lets be mature and have fun, people.
2. You can refer to either the mythology or Marvel's version, but I shall be using Marvel, as I know more about it.
3. No trolling. I want to have a nice, easy, relaxed debate, where everyone is NICE!!!!!
Round 1- Acceptance only. Full introduction required, please.
Rounds 2 to 4- The battle begins.
I would like to wish good luck to my opponent :)
in Thor 2 ,Loki is represented as quite evil as he tricks his 'brother' Thor .we know he is a illusionists and he takes on the figure of a father and making Thor and his men believe with great sadness that Loki is dead., this makes the public try and guess what happened to the father, did Loki kill him or not?
Anyway, on to my first argument:
My opponent recently stated that in the first Thor film, you start to see a different side to Loki, but in reality, you were seeing a different side to him from the start. Loki grew up living in Thor's shadow, but because he never said anything, his emotions were bottled up and became stronger over time.
Of course, something like this isn't easy to cover up, unless you are a master of illusions and tricks like Loki. So, the innocent child you see at the start of the film is most likely just an act, and when Loki finds out he's adopted, and could be considered a monster, he lets his feelings out. This is when you see the real him, because he is saying what's been on his mind for goodness knows how long, and is not afraid to do it. Granted, he may of wanted the Asgardian throne a little too much, but, hey, shadows are dark places. Trust me, I know.
The first Thor film was just a case of sibling rivalry turned sour, and it only ended in "death" for Loki because his so-called father Odin failed to recognise Loki's feelings, which is why he is seen as evil.
And, to conclude, Loki has just been living in Thor's shadow his whole life, and c'mon, there is no way Odin can be dead, because marvel would have turned it into an extra fight scene. You know the sort, where the hero finds out his un-trusted ally has actually been deceiving him the whole time, and there is a huge fight where the "ally" is crowned the secondary villain of the film, kills another main character, and then either dies or mysteriously disappears. Finally, I don't think marvel would make thor an orphan, especially because one parent-related death in a film is bad enough.
Loki is not truly evil -he is just a cinematic foil for Thor.... without an antagonist, Thor couldn't be widely perceived as 'good'. I view Loki as a character that is misunderstood by some of the public viewersas i see him as a little brother trying to get his big brother to notice him. we all can see Loki showing his true emotions when his mother dies.
although the name Loki represents/means an evil creature, in most marvel movies not everything is what it seems.
and also can I point out that Loki the 'Asgardian God of Mischief and Lies', the adopted son of Odin and the archenemy of his brother, Thor. although His cosmic meddling led to the formation of the Avengers. now he is now a part of the Young Avengers. this show that Loki cannot truly be evil as he is part of a good organisation that saves the world many times.
I think that the public must see Loki from between the lines and background movements towards goodness to be able to view that he is not truly evil.
I opened this debate with a title stating, "Is Loki Truly Evil?". I also opened this debate standing for the con side, meaning I do not think Loki is evil whatsoever. My opponent then accepted my debate, claiming to stand for pro, meaning they are saying Loki IS evil. From what I have read, my opponent has just been backing up my arguments by giving evidence that Loki is not evil. This means that either I have read this all wrong, or my opponent has gotten the wrong idea.
I just wanted to clear that all up, and I am awaiting my opponent's response. If this is indeed the case, I am willing to restart this debate, with correct arguments being made.
debatable1999 forfeited this round.
Loki, the biological son of Laufey, king of Jotunheim, was found after a battle between two realms, and was raised as the second son of Odin. Loki was brought up to believe that he had a chance to rule over Asgard, and that that was where he truly belonged. But, in reality, he was being lied to. Because Loki was a frost giant, he should have lived in Jotunheim, and ruled over that. But instead of being taken back to his real family, Loki was kept in Asgard and was never told he was adopted until he was an adult and the throne had already gone to his adoptive brother Thor.
The fact that Loki had grown up in Thor's shadow his whole life, and that he could have been seen as a monster is proof enough that Odin favoured Thor, and Loki is misunderstood, and not evil.
also I apologies for the wrong side comments of my previous arguments although they have strengthened my opponents argument and therefore decreased my chances of winning this argument .but in hope that I can with this final post. But I have deep faith that the public will forgive my mistaking of my previous agreements and will still value my last argument when voting, thank you
Loki is the birth son of the Frost Giant Laufey, the former King of the Ice realm. Odin declared war and killed Laufey, when he saw Loki as a baby, He adopted him - This was to follow a prophecy done by his father Bor.
As I have said earlier Loki is the Asgardian God of Mischief and Lies, this in itself is an evil thing to be named after. The fact that Loki"s destiny is to be evil to himself.
Loki was not like his brother Thor, He proved to be a mischievous child, and was often also jealous of the affection Odin showed his older brother Thor. He began studying Asgardian magic and science, both of which he would become very proficient in, eventually becoming one of the strongest sorcerers in the Asgard. Loki is well known for cutting off the long, golden hair of Thor's love, Sif. He was forced by Thor to restore it. Loki then enlisted two dwarves to do so, but when he refused to pay them, they made new, black hair out of nothing.
In his youth, Loki tried again and again to get advantage over his Older brother Thor. Odin sent Thor, Balder, and Sif out to get materials for a sword. Loki followed them secretly, but found that an evil goddess was about to attack, and was forced to alert them instead of stopping them. Meanwhile, Odin loved Thor so much that he was preparing his greatest gift to the young Thor. When Thor turned eight, Odin had a magical hammer created, an amazingly powerful one - Mjolnir. Loki was jealous, and he showed his first signs of evil. He interfered with Mjolnir while it was still being made-he caused the handle to be made too short. As a boy, he wanted Mjolnir's power which would someday be Thor's and often tried to steal it.
This all had an effect on Loki. He grew angrier with each passing day, he was truly becoming evil. His hate for Thor and desire to rule Asgard manifested along with his sorcery and mischief. He got jaded and evil. He finally made a vow-to be the most powerful god in Asgard, And to kill his brother Thor.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SPENCERJOYAGE14 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:||4||1|
Reasons for voting decision: The following RFDs are not because of who I agreed with, but how you both debated. Let's start with conduct I'm standing firm to the belief that a forfeit equals lose of conduct and so conduct is given to pro. Next we'll discuses spelling and grammar. I am awarding this to pro because con had a few noticeable mistakes in spelling and abbreviated words and sentences. Now we will go down to the most convincing arguments. Con gave the most convincing arguments because she understood her position. Pro was a little confused in his position, and debated for the con side of the debate. Most reliable sources is a tie because nobody used sources at all. Now I will show you what you can both do to become better debaters. 1) Never abbreviate words other then the grammatically obvious (ie: you're, don't). 2) Always read your debate argument three or four times to make sure you arguments are spelled correctly and your grammar is sound. (extra will be added to the comments )
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.