The Instigator
Aiko
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Deadlykris
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Reading books is better than watching TV

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 6 votes the winner is...
Deadlykris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/13/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,432 times Debate No: 29125
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (6)

 

Aiko

Pro

In my opinion reading is much better than watching TV, because if you read more books you will be more intelligent
Deadlykris

Con

At face value, this seems to be correct and true. However, I feel that it's more the content of the media, rather than which media format, that makes the difference. You could read children's books (aimed at beginning readers) and I could watch science documentaries, and in the end I would gain more knowledge, thus promoting more intelligence.

Books generally have an advantage in this regard, but that doesn't mean that the advantage is not circumstantially insurmountable.
Debate Round No. 1
Aiko

Pro

Thank you for your respond, I agree with you in some points. I think we should consider cons and pros of TV programs and books which are at the same level. Of course we cannot compare cartoon books for children with a scientific TV programs.
First of all, let's talk about cartoons for children, if we take the most popular cartoon channels such as Nickelodeon, Jetix, Cartoon Network they show meaningless cartoons, from those cartoons children cannot take any subject. If you read a book for your child or he reads the books, then he will take subject, he can improve his abilities also his reading skills. For example, I was grown up with fairy tales which written by The Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson and by Kazakh writers such as Ibyray Altynsarin, Berdibek Sokpakpaev. I can say that they were more useful than cartoons on TV.
Secondly, if we talk about Historical events, of course it is easy to watch it, but the TV program cannot show you the whole story, all details, facts and dates. You cannot understand what happened in the past in time around an hour. If you want understand everything correctly you should read books thoroughly, you need extra information and researches. The same with the scientific programs which last not more than an hour which is not enough to cover the topics (about animals, technology, architecture, etc.) It gives superficial knowledge.
Also it is better to read books in a romantic, adventure, detective genre. Movies do not deliver all the meaning. The film directors sometimes miss the important details. Sometimes the actors can"t feel those emotions, which they should. Their characters can"t connect with the books" characters. Books give you a chance to imagine. You can imagine how characters look like, when TV already had made it. You feel everything by reading; you can be in that period of time and in that event.
Undoubtedly, when you read you do not use more electricity, which costs more than books, through that you can save your money.
In conclusion, reading books makes your brain work and develop, makes your imagination work, expands your vocabulary and helps to improve your writing skills.
Deadlykris

Con

Given the same information presented, in the same level of detail, the time invested is not dependent on the medium used but rather the reading speed of the individual being presented the information. Furthermore, there are some concepts better suited to one medium or another.

For example, is it better to describe an explosion in words, or even still photographs, or is it better to simply show a video clip of the explosion? The video, in this case, conveys the information better. On the other hand, it is better to explain in writing the depth of emotion felt by one character for another, or to try to somehow convey that by their actions? Much easier, in my experience, to convey such things in print than in actions.

In conclusion, I don't argue that TV is better than books, but rather that the situation is not so simple, and thus can't be simplified in such a manner. Books are generally better, but this doesn't hold true in all situations, for all subject matter.
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
Thanks.
Posted by rowsdower 1 year ago
rowsdower
You did a good job.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
Kinda challenging to debate against my own opinion. I had to find a different angle :)
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by minstrel 1 year ago
minstrel
AikoDeadlykrisTied
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: Pro's statement, which I generally agree with, was a little too broad. Con rightly pointed this out.
Vote Placed by CIIReligion 1 year ago
CIIReligion
AikoDeadlykrisTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Well if Dale can vote bomb for the wrong reasons, I can vote bomb for the right reasons. CON had better arguments!
Vote Placed by rowsdower 1 year ago
rowsdower
AikoDeadlykrisTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree in general with the concept presented by pro but con does make a valid point that the nature of the content can affect what medium it is best presented in. Con also made a good point that the quality of the content could be more important than the medium.
Vote Placed by Dale.G 1 year ago
Dale.G
AikoDeadlykrisTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: the reason why I voted for Pro is because books are much better then watching TV why well we learn more reading then we do watching TV I had to go to school to learn I did not take my TV to school with me but I had to take my books with me to read at school :) plus if the a math channel where we can just sit down and watch math all day long I need to listen to the School teacher and read math books to learn how to work out numbers I learned a lot more by reading then watching TV when I used to come home from School I used to not watch TV to get my assessments done I had to read drama books to get me through Drama :)
Vote Placed by DoctorDeku 1 year ago
DoctorDeku
AikoDeadlykrisTied
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: I buy con's argument that it isn't the media you're reading, but in the end it's the message inherent in the media.
Vote Placed by Cobo 1 year ago
Cobo
AikoDeadlykrisTied
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: I think this debate was too short to for eh side to expand on their stances, but Con made the better argument at the end.