The Beatles are the most influential band ever.
Debate Rounds (2)
The Beatles were by far the most influential band ever. They have inspired almost every type of music in one way or another, and have influenced about 80% of the bands and singers that came after them.
Coming from a fellow musician, I can see how they were not at all musically informed. For instance, only one of them ever actually learned how to read music. Yet at the same time, It is almost impossible to name a singer or group of musicians that came after them that was not influenced by them (one example being the popular band Oasis). From the period known as "Beatlemania" on, rock music was greatly changed. Along with this transformation, the Beatles inspired brand new types of music. Their own music was revolutionary at the time, a mix of rock and roll, pop, and blues was brand new and completely unusual for the music world. Along with this, the Beatles presented unusual fashion statements. The Beatles rocked the video world too, making movies based on their songs, and creating completely original music videos, the Beatles changed life as the world new it. Referring to the topic statement, I believe that the Beatles were most definitely the most influential band ever, as they were the first band to really make it big. The Beatles becoming popular paved the way for other bands to have great success, instead of just solo artists like Elvis or Sinatra. Along with being the first band to really make it big, the Beatles were also the first British musician/s to be popular in the US. Part of the reason for this success was the way they used instruments to play a part that it would not usually play. The instrument choices were unusual as the record companies generally wrote the songs for each musician. The Beatles chose to rebel against that though, and found a record company that would let them write and perform their own original music. I now restate my thesis that the Beatles are the most influential band ever.
I challenge you to find a musician or group of musicians that was not affected by the Beatles in some way, and to present to me a band that was/is more influential than the Beatles.
The issue with my opponent's argument is the statement that created as this resolution, "The Beatles are the most influential band ever" and by that statement one must automatically include all pre-Beatles bands as well. That being said, let us look at a few things.
Definition of influence, influential and influenced (only copying the ones relevant to the argument):
1. A power affecting a person, thing, or course of events, especially one that operates without any direct or apparent effort
1. To produce an effect on by imperceptible or intangible means; sway.2. To affect the nature, development, or condition of; modify.
Having or exerting influence
One that is of considerable importance or influence
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com... and http://www.thefreedictionary.com...)
Definition of "Ever":
2. a. At any time
So, by this definition, one can conclude that someone who influences a "course of events" and in an "intangible or imperceptible way" is influential. Well, it is only logical to also state that a "course of events" may be, The Beatles influenced another band, who influenced another band who influenced another band, and by that the Beatles were an influence within that line and course of events. However, were the Beatles the first band in that course of event? By the statement made in the resolution, this is not true, as music has been around since before the Beatles. So, one may conclude that by definition, an influenced chain of events may go back for centuries and milenia. While one may find this to be slightly absurd, because by this concept you can infer that any single action taken was influenced by millions of possible people due to them influencing the society, that caused the family that raised the person, that took the action sometime in their life. However, logically and based on the definitions that have been created, without establishing a time limit (i.e. the past century, the past fifty years, etc) then all time must be included within the scope of this debate.
For that, I present two arguments.
1. By claiming that the Beatles are the most influential ever, one is assuming that we are only discussing modern popular music which was not defined in the resolution, the resolution was that they were the most influential band ever, not of popular music. Because of this, one now must also include the millions of musicians, bands, musical artists, and instrument players around the world, and of all time. This then makes it quite simple to state that there are musicians that were not influenced by the Beatles. As without question, there have been millions of musicians prior to the Beatles and even after that either did not have the capabilities to hear the Beatles or in the case of predecessors...well I don't need to explain.
2. Leading off the fact that we must now include every musician ever and all over the world, we now are in a conundrum. The logical assumption now presents that fact that whoever first created music is by default the most influential musician ever, and in regards to bands (definition A group of musicians who perform as an ensemble. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...) it would be whoever first made music with another person, as it does not state how many are required.
The problem with the second point is that music pre-dates recorded history. Only from archaeological findings can we determine the musical capabilities of pre-historic civilizations. The oldest musicians are found to be in China and the Indus Valley "The earliest and largest collection of prehistoric musical instruments was found in China and dates back to between 7000 and 6600 BC." (http://en.wikipedia.org... and http://tinyurl.com...).
Hebrew history through Biblical and historical records point to Jubal being credited as the first musician (http://www.biblegateway.com...), and the first mention of music being in Genesis 31 (http://www.biblegateway.com...). The oldest song, non-biblical dates back to 4000BCE (http://www.amaranthpublishing.com...).
In conclusion, one can logically conclude that due to the definitions presented, the Beatles were not the most influential band ever. While one cannot pinpoint an exact "creator of music" it is only logical to conclude that through the definition of influence and influential, that any one of the prehistoric or biblical musicians influenced millions more than the Beatles ever did or could, because by the process of logical, the chain of events from the creators of music, through to the Beatles is thus part of the influence.
In addition, by the definition that an influence is part of a chain of events, one can conclude, as well, that any influence on the Beatles themselves is thus, in part, involved in the chain of events. For example, Paul McCartney stated that Sgt. Peppers was created as a response to Pet Sounds by the Beach Boys, and a line in Come Together is pulled from Chuck Berry's "You Can't Catch Me". (http://www.beatlesbible.com...). Regardless of if these specific albums or songs influenced the most people, they contribute to the success of the Beatles, therefore the influences on them were involved in that chain of events, thus Chuck Berry, The Beach Boys, Bob Dylan, and any others that influenced the Beatles were therefore more influential because they were part of the success of the Beatles. So, if we were to narrow this to the 20th and 21st centuries and only modern British and American music, The Beatles are still not the most influential because they were in turn influenced by someone and therefore that influence carried on to whoever the Beatles personally influenced.
If this debate had been structured to state, "Since their inception, no band has been more influential than the Beatles" then your argument might hold more weight, though it could still be contested. However, that was not the structure, it was "The Beatles are the most influential band ever" and that, by logical process, cost you your debate and eliminates them by logic and definition.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by hghppjfan 4 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:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro- only opinion Con- only facts In conclusion: Con
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.