The Instigator
silvertechfilms
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TheDarkMuffin
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

Star Wars > Star Trek

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 4 votes the winner is...
TheDarkMuffin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,581 times Debate No: 34412
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

silvertechfilms

Pro

Star Wars > Star Trek
TheDarkMuffin

Con

To clarify, I, as Con, will be arguing that Star Trek is more impressive than Star Wars while my opponent, as Pro, will be arguing that Star Wars is more impressive than Star Trek.

As such, the BoP will be shared. If my opponent has any issues with this, I'd like him to resolve it in either the next round or the comments. Otherwise, I think my opponent should present the first argument.
Debate Round No. 1
silvertechfilms

Pro

Star Wars is a visual art form.
http://boards.theforce.net...
http://boards.theforce.net...
http://boards.theforce.net...

If not for Star Wars, ground breaking companies such as THX and Pixar would of never been created, thus we would be without a lot of great films we are fortunate to have today.
TheDarkMuffin

Con

I'll keep the bulk of my rebuttals escononced for now, simply for the sake of some chronology to my side. As such, I'll keep this mostly to my own argument for now.

I believe Star Trek is more impressive than Star Wars as per the following reasons.

Audience Aesop

More than likely, a tendency you're not oblivious to is the tendency to have a lesson taught in shows. The audience has to learn something. The audience must be an Aesop.

Often, a media production is evaluated, not only by the effectiveness of its own existence but, by the notion implied as a lesson, or the lesson explicitly said.

That said, Star Trek's lessons are definitely more relevant. Star Wars has Yoda delve into philosophy. His philosophies are philosophies which we would categorize as those we have already considered[1], him having not added much onto the pre-existent wisdom, and those that he himself has a lot of trouble justifying, and justifying the violation of.[2] Or his advice is simply not that that would make an Aesop of the audience at all.[3]

Two well known instances would be: "Do or do not. There is no try."; "Hate...leads to suffering."

The violation of a well formed Aesop is clear in both. If a necessity to clarify arises, then I hope my opponent requests it so I may comply. Otherwise, I don't believe that's necessary.

On the other hand, Star Trek certainly has Aesops throughout the show.[4][5][6]

Influence on Technology

Star Trek is known for influencing several aspects of our culture, including our culture overall. However, I don't verily don't believe any of those arguments are necessary yet, so I'll simply bring it to attention that Star Trek has a huge influence on technology.[7]

As I have several debates to attend to, this one has been kept rather short, though I'm sure this is plenty for my opponent to rebut. Good luck!


    1. http://tvtropes.org...

    1. http://tvtropes.org...

    1. http://tvtropes.org...

    1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

    1. http://thoughtcatalog.com...

    1. http://www.thefrisky.com...

    1. http://www.howstuffworks.com...
Debate Round No. 2
silvertechfilms

Pro

Way to copy everything from Wikipedia
TheDarkMuffin

Con

I don't believe my opponent is arguing his point right now.

An Apparent Plethora of Pestilential Plagiarism

My opponent's last round consisted of one sentence.

"Way to copy everything from Wikipedia."

This doesn't argue for Star Wars being superior to Star Trek in any way, but I'll rebut it anyways for the sake of Conduct.

Now, you'll probably notice that I cited my sources. Sources definitely not cited by Wikipedia, nor are these in Wikipedia's description of Star Trek or Star Wars, nor are the citations themselves Wikipedia!

Also, there's some glaring hypocrisy in this statement, following my opponent's logic, as nearly his entire argument in the second round is using external sources.

Way to copy everything from a popular forum.

This may not be true, it may simply be a wild, way off assumption, but I believe my opponent didn't prepare much of an argument and is now attempting to evoke a rise out of me so I lose Conduct points so that my opponent can win the debate riding off of that. If that's not true, I'd like my opponent to explain his reason for such an accusation.

To emphasize it more, because I really believe my opponent should've actually created a debate with the intention of debating, my opponent did not create an argument.
Debate Round No. 3
silvertechfilms

Pro

Beam me up Scotty
TheDarkMuffin

Con

Being that that wasn't even a contribution to a coherent argument, I think it should be taken as a postulate that my opponent has completely conceded, unless a sufficient argument is presented next round.

If Pro disappoints this, I strongly urge anyone who votes to deduct Conduct points from my opponent.
Debate Round No. 4
silvertechfilms

Pro

Star Trek is great, but Star Wars is still better.
TheDarkMuffin

Con

I don't believe I'd be very likely to be acquiescing to my opponent's will to end this debate anti-climatically. So, I'll create a conclusion for this debate.

Inherently Influential Imagery

Aristotle's Six Elements of Drama [1][2]:
  • Language
  • Theme
  • Plot
  • Spectacle
  • Music
  • Character

For a select number of these, I've already made an argument. For instance, Theme. See Audience Aesop. My opponent made an argument for Spectacle. I've made an argument against character for Star Wars, which my opponent did not refute.


In summation:

  • Language: Neglected
  • Theme: Star Trek
  • Plot: Neglected
  • Spectacle: Star Wars
  • Music: Neglected
  • Character: Star Trek

Inherently Influential Influence

Both parties of this debate argued for the influence that each franchise has made. I don't believe any attempts at quantification for this have been made necessary, so this can easily be neglected.

Overall, this has been rather disappointing. Nonetheless, I'm glad that this topic was brought up.

  1. http://bellevuecollege.edu...
  2. http://homepage.smc.edu...
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by TheDarkMuffin 3 years ago
TheDarkMuffin
It's my understanding that they have completely different definitions altogether.
Posted by justin.graves 3 years ago
justin.graves
Despite what Skrone said in the voting, it is "Trekker," not "Trekkie."
Posted by TheDarkMuffin 3 years ago
TheDarkMuffin
That's odd. My sources didn't do that when I reviewed them.
Posted by RyuuKyuzo 3 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
Now THIS is a debate topic!
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 3 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
I wish I could do this one.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by HeartOfGod 3 years ago
HeartOfGod
silvertechfilmsTheDarkMuffinTied
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: Con's arguments were so much more in depth, even though star wars in better.
Vote Placed by justin.graves 3 years ago
justin.graves
silvertechfilmsTheDarkMuffinTied
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: Like: BOOM! Pro is a loser. Con deflected Pro's Wikipedia attack. Total butt-whooping. Barely better than a total F.F.
Vote Placed by Skrone 3 years ago
Skrone
silvertechfilmsTheDarkMuffinTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I have to once again realize that some people just don't know what they are doing. This is a serious topic (being a Trekkie myself) want to see it done right. Good job TheDarkMuffin
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 3 years ago
1Historygenius
silvertechfilmsTheDarkMuffinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I always thought of the two as equals and since Pro did nothing, I tried to put myself in his position. I felt unable to fully refute Con's points, so my opinion changed. Con won everything. Pro had bad conduct for not even trying to debate. Con had all the good arguments and used more and reliable sources. Pro only ties spellling and grammar.