Mayonnaise is in fact an instrument
Debate Rounds (3)
A musical sound is any tone with characteristics such as controlled pitch and timbre.
By hitting, or stirring mayo you can create a slapping or swooshing sound which you can control based on how much mayo there is or how hard you are slapping or stirring.
I wish my opponent good luck, whoever they may be.
P.S before answering, watch this video: https://www.youtube.com...
A cat purrs. Is that mean its a xylophone or something?
A toilet flushes and makes noise. I don't hear any toilets flushing on Lady Gaga's duet with Tony Bennett!
I can stomp on styrofoam. It doesn't make me Nostradamus!
"Mayonnaise was invented in 1756 by the French chef of the Duc de Richelieu. After the Duc beat the British at Port Mahon, his chef created a victory feast that was to include a sauce made of cream and eggs. Realizing that there was no cream in the kitchen, the chef substituted olive oil for the cream and a new culinary creation was born. The chef named the new sauce 'Mahonnaise' in honor of the Duc's victory."
There is NO mention of it being a musical instrument, whatsoever. I can hardly believe someone seriously came up with this.
Note that an instrument does not have to be musical, and neither did I specify that it is a musical instrument, while that was part of my first argument, I did not state mayo is ONLY a musical instrument .
I would like to quote my opponent "(mayo) It is designed to be spread over a piece of bread in order to enhance the flavor thereof"
A definition of an instrument is something used by another as a means or aid.
A sandwich is meant to be eaten and a large part of eating is the taste. When you eat something, isn't the first thing that comes to mind how it tastes? A lemon for example, when you put it in your mouth instantly your face will pucker up because it tastes sour. Mayo is used to aid, or enhance, the taste of a sandwich. Therefore the sandwich is using it as an aid to its taste.
I would also like to point out that my opponent said mayonnaise can not be an instrument because that was not its purpose, I would like to prove that he is wrong.
Take bubble wrap as an example, it is used for packaging, correct? That was not its original purpose. It was originally meant to be wallpaper, but the designers realized it would be a good packaging tool, or instrument.
I will quote my source below:
Bubble wrap was invented in 1957 by engineers Alfred Fielding and Marc Chavannes in Hawthorne, New Jersey, USA. Fielding and Chavannes sealed two shower curtains together, creating a smattering of air bubbles, which they originally tried to sell as wallpaper. When the product turned out to be unsuccessful as wallpaper, the team marketed it as greenhouse insulation.Although Bubble Wrap was branded by Sealed Air Corporation (founded by Fielding and Chavannes) in 1960, it was not until a year later that its use in protective packaging was discovered.
So bubble wrap had TWO purposes it was meant to be used for before it became used for what we use it for today.
In fact I would just like to point out that in my video (first round) Squidward states that mayo is in fact NOT an instrument, why do I bring this up, you ask?
We know that people who are stupid know less, and according to this chart (found from various sources) Squidward is below average when it comes to intelligence so we must assume he knows less than an average person and therefore we can conclude that his word is not reliable.
Here is the chart
My opponent said that just because a cat purrs it is not a musical instrument. While that may or may not be true, a cat is most defiantly an instrument. For those of you who have a cat, hasn't he or she picked you up when you were sad, or made you happy just when you thought you would cry? If so that means the cat is an aid, or means to your happiness. As stated above, an instrument is something used by something else as an aid or means to do or obtain something, isn't the cat helping you obtain happiness, just as the mayo is aiding the sandwich in tasting good?
1. The Con writes, "I did not state mayo is ONLY a musical instrument ."
I reply that the Con clearly implied that mayonaise was a musical instrument, if not specifically stating it. For example, if I say, "Some actors are really dang short. Joe Pesci was in Goodfellas." I may not be explicitly stating that Joe Pesci is short, but, by implication, I am indeed stating such. The Con cannot wiggle out of this on a technicality.
2. The Con writes, "So bubble wrap had TWO purposes it was meant to be used for before it became used for what we use it for today."
I reply that the Con has demonstrated NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that mayonaise can be used in a legitimate musical setting. Spoons, too, are used primarily for eating, but I would never deny the inherently musical qualities of spoons. Mayonnaise, however, is an altogether different animal. If it mayonnaise makes ANY NOISE AT ALL, that noise is disgusting, and no one would listen to it except maybe fans of Punk Rock.
4. The Con writes, "Squidward is below average when it comes to intelligence so we must assume he knows less than an average person and therefore we can conclude that his word is not reliable."
I reply that the Con's chart is not authoritative when we look at the consensus of science on the intelligence of squids. On the contrary, squids are highly intelligent, and their brain capacities dwarfs that of a squirrel by orders of magnitude.
"The cephalopod class of mollusks are considered the most intelligent invertebrates and an important example of advanced cognitive evolution amongst animals in general. The coleoidea sub-class of the cephalopods includes the orders of cuttlefish, squid and octopuses and it is these (particularly the latter two) which are considered the most intelligent. Without exception all cephalopods are active predators and the ability to locate and capture prey often demands some sort of reasoning power."
See the youtube video I posted demonstrating the utter idiocy of stinkin' squirrels.
If the Con has any human decency, they will concede this point and do it publicly before one and all.
21. The Con writes, "a cat is most defiantly an instrument."
I reply that the Con is clearly changing the definitions. By implication, they indicated mayonnaise was a music instrument. Now they are saying a cat is an "instrument" because its furry, innocent and uncomprehending face somehow calms the raging storm within. Now, while I cannot deny the medicinal properties of cats, mayonnaise is, in fact, unhealthy. Japan, for instance, was a nation with no history of obesity outside of Sumo wrestlers until Western Capitalist Imperialism introduced mayonnaise to their shores:
I quote: "One of the causes of Japanese is obesity is the popularity of 'Puga-chan', which is a confection of squirrel, squid, sponge and star-fish fried in mayonnaise and covered with a light dusting of paprika. Studies have conclusively proven that Japanese people who eat this every breakfast balloon up as big as stinkin' walruses, and they're not even the Sumos! Vote Con!"
Clearly I am winning this debate, as usual. The Con should have thought twice before messing with mightbenihilism.
The blue man group, for example, uses buckets and bins as a drum kit. Many people go see the blue man group every time they perform. Those buckets' original purpose was not to be used as an instrument, it is the same with mayonnaise. In fact who is to say that the buckets aren't filled with mayonnaise. In fact I saw a few street performers attempting to imitate the blue man group (by using buckets as drums) and during the performance I realized that one smaller bucket, was filled with ketchup! Who is to say that one of the other buckets wasn't filled with another condiment, such as mayo maybe? I believe it is wholly possible. Before con begins to argue that "it isn't music" or that "nobody would listen to it" I would like to point out that they had attracted a numerous group of people and were receiving large tips. That most likely means that people did enjoy the music coming from the instruments made of condiments.
My opponent argues that cephalopods are intelligent. Whether that is true or not does not matter. When a real life cephalopod tells my mayonnaise is not an instrument, I may change my point of view.
I say again that while an instrument does not have to be solely for music, for the sake of keeping an interesting debate
I will argue with the fact that it is.
I would just like to point out that con numbered his points incorrectly: He skipped #3 and instead of putting #5 he wrote #21.
May the best debater win.
The prosecution rests.
It is almost painful to bring it up, but for the sake of truth, I will --- keep in mind, I have no animosity towards my opponent when I say this, and I am saying it merely because the truth must come out on this issue. It would be a disservice to the huddled masses of humanity to sugar coat it.
My opponent brings up the blue man group. The blue man group, s/he sez, are an example of a music outfit which uses anti-musical objects to make quasi music sounds. This is correct. However, they clearly do not use mayonnaise. Even if their tubs or pipes or whatever were filled with mayonnaise, it is not mayonnaise itself which is making the sound. It is the percussive elements of the pipes. Mayonnaise may be muting the sound, but to say that such is the sound of mayonaise is equivalent to saying that the sound of a guitar is the sound of a muted palm. It is not. The palm-muting is only one aspect of the entire rigamorale.
Now, I ask you, dear readers --- if mayonaise, in itself, were musical, wouldn't the blue man group be using it? Consider the types of "instruments" they use in their live shows, numerically:
1. Cackling geese
2. Wiffle-ball bats
3. 5 howling pugs
4. A beluga whales
6. A marwals
5. Probably some goldfishes (not the cracker kind)
8. Tap-dancers or two
9. Fish sticks
11. A tabby cats
12. A microwave
13. An old episode of "All in the Family"
13. Pez dispenser
14. A tire iron
15. The bassoon
16. Oranges with little umbrellas sticking out of them
17. VHS tapes
Considering this, it is clear that not only did I win this debate, but my victory in this debate is so complete and assured that I even won adjacent debates. That is, just as a large stone when thrown into a pool causes a splash so large it can even get into the neighbors' yard, so too my victory here is so astounding and amazing that it means I have won other debates that I did not even join in, or comment on. This victory is probably going in the Guiness world records as the most biggest win in any debate ever.
Nonetheless, I appreciate my opponent for making such a lousy case for the use of mayonnaise as a music instrument, for it ensures that I will now be mad a judge on this website and get paid real money into my paypal for doing so.
Thank you, opponent! May your next loss not be so gruesome!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 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: con showed that mayonnaise's true purpose was of course not being an instrument, but he could not show it being, nevertheless, an instrument
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.