The Instigator
hghppjfan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
WriterSelbe
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Resolved: Musicals are very important to society.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
WriterSelbe
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/24/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,219 times Debate No: 25806
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

hghppjfan

Pro

Hello, everyone.

Here is how the debate will work:

I am the affirmative. This will mean that I am going to say that musicals are very important to society. My opponent, whoever decided to challenge me, will say that musicals are not important to society. First round is acceptance, the rest are debatable. You can add arguments anytime (other than the first round), but you must wait to rebuttal until the third round.

My opponent will make the extra rules and ask any questions that is to do with this debate.
WriterSelbe

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
hghppjfan

Pro

I believe that musicals are very important to society.

A. It make more jobs
1. You can be a part of a musical and/or orchestra if you do not have a job
B. It gives more role models
1. Actors could be good role models
2. Musicals itself could show what is good and bad based upon a society's judgement
C. It gives us money
1. People can love a musical so much that they listen to it everyday and people from other countries may want to buy it.
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for his response. As the negative, I must prove that musicals are not very important to society.


I will now critique my opponent's case.


A. It makes more jobs.


While it does make more jobs, there aren't that many made. In fact, there are very few. The only difference between the number of jobs for a regular play and a musical is about one, and this is the vocal director.

1. You can be a part of a musical and/or orchestra if you do not have a job


This argument is false. If you cannot get a job in another field, that does not mean you will automatically be able to work in a musical. Being in a musical means you have to be able to sing and well, at that. Not everyone can sing. To be in an orchestra, talent is required as well. So, technically, the dependent clause would only be correct if it said, 'if you have musical talent.'


B. It gives more role models



Many things provide us with role models, though this does not necessarily make them important or very important. Why is it important to have role models?


1. Actors could be good role models


This statement leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, actors could be good role models, but this doesn't mean they are. However, this still does not prove role models are important to society. What role does one want to play? Shouldn't one develop one's own person?


2. Musicals itself could show what is good and bad based upon a society's judgement


My idle and offhand conversations also do this, but this does not make them very important to society. Even if they show what is good and bad in society, most things do that. That doesn't make them important. Why is it important that a musical shows societal pros and cons? Why would it make a musical very important to society if it did that?


C. It gives us money


Now, this statement is wrong. While it does give the musical actors/actresses money, this doesn't necessarily benefit us as a society. The musical play industry isn't big enough for it to horribly impact the world if it were to disappear. If it were the automobile industry, maybe. But musicals? No. They are not very important.

1. People can love a musical so much that they listen to it everyday and people from other countries may want to buy it


While it might be important to one person to listen to a musical everyday, that doesn't make it very important to society. Also, a country could not buy a musical. A certain company within the country may buy the rights to perform a musical but the country wouldn't buy it. Also, why would it be important to our society if a business in another country wanted to buy it?


Importance must be proven; the contentions must link back to the resolution.

I look forward to my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 2
hghppjfan

Pro

Hey! You were not supposed to rebuttal until this round. Punishment will be determined later.

(response to A) While it does make more jobs, there aren't that many made. In fact, there are very few. The only difference between the number of jobs for a regular play and a musical is about one, and this is the vocal director.

A. Yes, there may be one more job between a play and a job, but the economy is so bad these days, people will do anything to get a job. I am glad that musicals are continuing to come out because it gives more people jobs.

(response to 1)This argument is false. If you cannot get a job in another field, that does not mean you will automatically be able to work in a musical. Being in a musical means you have to be able to sing and well, at that. Not everyone can sing. To be in an orchestra, talent is required as well. So, technically, the dependent clause would only be correct if it said, 'if you have musical talent.'

A. Not necessarily. You can be part of the crew.

(response to B) Many things provide us with role models, though this does not necessarily make them important or very important. Why is it important to have role models?

A. It is important to have role models because it may lead us to our life. For example, my mom was going down a bad spiral at one time. The musical, GODSPELL, saved her.

(response to 1) This statement leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, actors could be good role models, but this doesn't mean they are. However, this still does not prove role models are important to society. What role does one want to play? Shouldn't one develop one's own person?

A. As I said above, they provide good role models, even the bad ones. The bad ones show what is not good and done in society and turn away from it.

(response to 2)My idle and offhand conversations also do this, but this does not make them very important to society. Even if they show what is good and bad in society, most things do that. That doesn't make them important. Why is it important that a musical shows societal pros and cons? Why would it make a musical very important to society if it did that?

A. Same answer as response to 1

(response to C) Now, this statement is wrong. While it does give the musical actors/actresses money, this doesn't necessarily benefit us as a society. The musical play industry isn't big enough for it to horribly impact the world if it were to disappear. If it were the automobile industry, maybe. But musicals? No. They are not very important.

A. Giving money to actors/actresses does benefit us money because they will be less in debt. Yes, it would impact society because people would lose jobs and the economy would just get worse.

(response to 1) While it might be important to one person to listen to a musical everyday, that doesn't make it very important to society. Also, a country could not buy a musical. A certain company within the country may buy the rights to perform a musical but the country wouldn't buy it. Also, why would it be important to our society if a business in another country wanted to buy it?

A. One person could a musical tell it to another person, which could tell another person, which all three will tell another person, and then it will go onto face book. That pretty much is society today. The part about buying a musical was what I was trying to say, but it came out wrong. It would be important to us if another country would buy it because we could buy it back.
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for his response, yet note that he said in the first round that everything else was debatable except the round for acceptance. It is odd to say that punishment will be determined later.


In response to his rebuttal tomy critique of point A, my opponent says, "A. Not necessarily. You can be part of the crew." However, for something to be important it has to have a substantial impact, and the musical play industry is not very important. Statistics cannot even easily be found about the economy of musicals because they are so decidedly unimportant when it comes to the job market.

In response to my critique of the importance of role models, he responds, "A. It is important to have role models because it may lead us to our life. For example, my mom was going down a bad spiral at one time. The musical, GODSPELL, saved her." However, he didn't respond to my point that just because something provides us with role models doesn't make it important. For instance, my performing a small skit with my classmates at the talent show may bring in a miniscule amount of money and hardly stimulate the economy, and I may at the same time be a role model to someone, but that doesn't mean my skit is important. It is, in fact, not.


In response to my critique that role models are not needed, as one should develop his own person, he says, "A. As I said above, they provide good role models, even the bad ones. The bad ones show what is not good and done in society and turn away from it." Not necessarily. Typically, bad role models are the ones that glorify indecent things that are bad for society. If someone is a role model to you, then their role is one you would want to fill. So, it does not show you to turn away from it. It glorifies it.


He does not respond to my questioning of why it is important for a musical to show societal pros and cons, and instead says same answer, which is, "As I said above, they provide good role models, even the bad ones. The bad ones show what is not good and done in society and turn away from it." This does not answer my questions. That essentially him answering the question, "Why is it important for a musical to show societal pros and cons?" with the answer, "Because it shows societal pros and cons."

He then responds to my point that musicals do not substantially effect the economy with, "A. Giving money to actors/actresses does benefit us money because they will be less in debt. Yes, it would impact society because people would lose jobs and the economy would just get worse." This doesn't prove that it benefits the economy. He doesn't link back and explain why this is helpful to the economy. Why does a musical actor/actress having less debt impact our economy? And why would that be important?


He is not proving it is important.

To my argument that a person buying the rights to a musical or liking it a lot is not important: "A. One person could a musical tell it to another person, which could tell another person, which all three will tell another person, and then it will go onto face book. That pretty much is society today. The part about buying a musical was what I was trying to say, but it came out wrong. It would be important to us if another country would buy it because we could buy it back." I really don't understand the point of this. I don't understand what this argument has to do with what I said. A country can't buy a musical, a country wouldn't purchase a musical if a country itself could own one, and musicals aren't important. Facebook is not the world.


I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 3
hghppjfan

Pro

I thank my opponent for his response, yet note that he said in the first round that everything else was debatable except the round for acceptance. It is odd to say that punishment will be determined later."

A. You're welcome about my response. Two things. First, I am a girl. Second, I said in the rules that ARGUMENTS were allowed at any time, meanwhile you have to WAIT until the third round to rebuttal.

"In response to his rebuttal time critique of point A, my opponent says, "A. Not necessarily. You can be part of the crew." However, for something to be important it has to have a substantial impact, and the musical play industry is not very important. Statistics cannot even easily be found about the economy of musicals because they are so decidedly unimportant when it comes to the job market."

Who said I was talking about the stock market. I was talking about the economy. I was saying that people would help everyone because people would spend it on musical. Some musical people raise money for charities. Charities thank everyone. This is one of the many theories in my plan of "the circle of money".

"In response to my critique of the importance of role models, he responds, "A. It is important to have role models because it may lead us to our life. For example, my mom was going down a bad spiral at one time. The musical, GODSPELL, saved her." However, he didn't respond to my point that just because something provides us with role models doesn't make it important. For instance, my performing a small skit with my classmates at the talent show may bring in a minuscule amount of money and hardly stimulate the economy, and I may at the same time be a role model to someone, but that doesn't mean my skit is important. It is, in fact, not.

A. It is important to you, your family, and your classmates. The money helps people either have fun or go off debt, and the economy is full of debt. You may be a role model to your parents or another kid's parents because they may be having a bad time, so your role is very important.

"In response to my critique that role models are not needed, as one should develop his own person, he says, "A. As I said above, they provide good role models, even the bad ones. The bad ones show what is not good and done in society and turn away from it." Not necessarily. Typically, bad role models are the ones that glorify indecent things that are bad for society. If someone is a role model to you, then their role is one you would want to fill. So, it does not show you to turn away from it. It glorifies it. "

A. Not necessarily back, Some people would not go to a certain role model because they are weird.

"He is not proving it is important.

To my argument that a person buying the rights to a musical or liking it a lot is not important: "A. One person could a musical tell it to another person, which could tell another person, which all three will tell another person, and then it will go onto face book. That pretty much is society today. The part about buying a musical was what I was trying to say, but it came out wrong. It would be important to us if another country would buy it because we could buy it back." I really don't understand the point of this. I don't understand what this argument has to do with what I said. A country can't buy a musical, a country wouldn't purchase a musical if a country itself could own one, and musicals aren't important. Facebook is not the world."

A. Facebook may not be a world, but it is a big part of the world.

Your turn!
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for her response. Also note, making arguments would mean negating the resolution, and I had to make a rebuttal to her to negate.

Regarding to my argument about musicals not making that many jobs and about how it doesn't have a substantial impact on the job market, my opponent says:

Who said I was talking about the stock market. I was talking about the economy. I was saying that people would help everyone because people would spend it on musical. Some musical people raise money for charities. Charities thank everyone. This is one of the many theories in my plan of "the circle of money".


Note I said job market, not stock. Now, my opponent hasn't actually provided any evidence stating that musicals do create a lot of jobs. How does people spending money on musicals help all of us when the industry isn't even prominent? If the industry isn't prominent, how can it be important? She says that it makes a lot of jobs, but she offers no proof.


In response to my argument that role models aren't that important and that people from musicals aren't prominent enough to be important for being role models:

A. It is important to you, your family, and your classmates. The money helps people either have fun or go off debt, and the economy is full of debt. You may be a role model to your parents or another kid's parents because they may be having a bad time, so your role is very important.


How does a musical making money help the economy at all? My opponent fails to explain this. All of the money goes to the producers/cast/etc. She is not linking this back to the resolution. She didn't respond to my point that people should create themselves rather than base themselves on the image of another.


When I say that not all role models are good, they say:

A. Not necessarily back, Some people would not go to a certain role model because they are weird.

Millions of people watch inappropriate tv shows and immitate that lifestyle. You can't say that everyone just ignores the 'bad' role models because they have bad behavior. Jershey Shore (http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com...) has millions of viewers and plugs the party lifestyle. You cannot say that there aren't people who imitate bad role models.


When I say that countries can't buy musicals and that it doesn't make it important if people share it on facebook/facebook isn't the world:

A. Facebook may not be a world, but it is a big part of the world.


But not everyone on facebook likes musicals, and neither does everyone in the world.

My opponent has failed to prove that musicals are important and lacks evidence.
Debate Round No. 4
hghppjfan

Pro

Last rebuttals:

"Note I said job market, not stock. Now, my opponent hasn't actually provided any evidence stating that musicals do create a lot of jobs. How does people spending money on musicals help all of us when the industry isn't even prominent? If the industry isn't prominent, how can it be important? She says that it makes a lot of jobs, but she offers no proof. "

A. Not that I might have read the wording wrong. Musicals create jobs in a musical: Managers (vocal, money, ect.), cast (main, supporting, extras, ect.), crew (lighting, sound, makeup, ect.), and many more.

"How does a musical making money help the economy at all? My opponent fails to explain this. All of the money goes to the producers/cast/etc. She is not linking this back to the resolution. She didn't respond to my point that people should create themselves rather than base themselves on the image of another. "

A. As I HAVE explained, the economy is in a big debt crisis. Money gets paid to actors and crew. The money is used to pay bills. Less debt=better for economy. People create themselves by becoming one of another person. Most people make mistakes, so they improvise and the play is not as usual as people expect.

"But not everyone on face book likes musicals, and neither does everyone in the world."

A. Not everyone likes one thing. For example, not everyone likes debating. There are always disagreements within a decision.

Here are my last arguments:
A. Musicals make people smarter because people can connect more things if they know something.
B. Most people see or hear at least one musical in their life.
C. The musical industry is more popular than the play industry.
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for her response. Now, in response to my argument that spending money on musicals doesn't actually create that many jobs and my argument she provides no evidence:


A. Not that I might have read the wording wrong. Musicals create jobs in a musical: Managers (vocal, money, ect.), cast (main, supporting, extras, ect.), crew (lighting, sound, makeup, ect.), and many more.


While saying this, my opponent provides no evidence that the jobs it creates are enough to be important. There is no evidence.


In response to my argument that those employed in musicals receiving pay will not benefit the economy or at least not enough for it to be important:

A. As I HAVE explained, the economy is in a big debt crisis. Money gets paid to actors and crew. The money is used to pay bills. Less debt=better for economy. People create themselves by becoming one of another person. Most people make mistakes, so they improvise and the play is not as usual as people expect.


My opponent provides no links for this. How does an individual having less bills help the economy? There is no evidence here. The second part is irrevelent and makes absolutely no sense.

To my argument that facebook is not the whole world and it doesn't really matter if one person likes a musical:

A. Not everyone likes one thing. For example, not everyone likes debating. There are always disagreements within a decision.


This doesn't disprove the argument that ones opinion of a musical is not important, though. Facebook is not the whole world, and one person's opinion is not important.



In conclusion, my opponent fails to offer evidence and links in her case. She does not prove that musicals are important. For this reason, I urge a negative ballot.

Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by WriterSelbe 4 years ago
WriterSelbe
As I am the negative, the only case I can make is one rebuting yours.
Posted by WriterSelbe 4 years ago
WriterSelbe
Punishment...? You said everything else but round one was debatable....
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
hghppjfanWriterSelbeTied
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: Pro never really seemed to provide a meaningful definition of what "very important to society" meant, and throughout the debate seemed to mainly argue that musicals had an impact on society, although not necessarily a big one. Con more or less successfully negated, so arguments to Con.