Who is the best superhero?
Only one character has a legitimate case for the title of greatest hero of all time, and I think we all know who that is...
I eagerly await Pro's case in Round 2.
While Superman is one of the greatest superheroes, he is not the greatest of all time. Superman's one weakness, kryptonite, would be easy to exploit. The Hulk, on the other hand, is virtually indestructible as he gets more powerful the angrier he gets. Therefor, the Hulk's power is virtually limitless as he would continue to get angrier and angrier as fights progress. The Hulk, or Bruce Banner, also has genius intelligence and near endless stamina. The Hulk also is immune to all disease and has regenerative healing powers.
The Hulk is also better than Superman in other ways. Superman lacks the little details that allow readers to relate to him as a character and a person. While we all look to superheroes because we dream to be them, we also need to be able to relate to the character so that it is easier for us to dream of being them. The Hulk has the little details and struggles that we all have in life that allows us to relate to him much easier. Superman is too much of a "perfect" superhero which leads many to despise the character of Superman because it is harder to relate to the character. The Hulk is also relateable because he is actually a human. The Hulk grew up just like any other normal human but gained his powers through gamma rays released through a bomb blast. Superman was raised on Earth with these powers and never had the same struggles controlling and developing his powers as the Hulk did. This also allows us to relate to the Hulk more because we go through the struggles and backstories with him along his journey.
Thank you and I look forward to your next argument.
I thank Pro for his case and the readers for sticking around. I assure you that this will not simply be a superhero dick measuring contest (though the rulers will eventually come out).
Naturally, Pro argues that his character choice is more powerful than mine. The inaccuracy of that statement notwithstanding, allow me to begin by asking a perhaps non-obvious question: So?
What is the relevance of determining which fictional hero could beat up the other in a fight or which one has more types of eye lasers they can employ in battle? If powers were the determinant of superiority, either one of us could have chosen more impressive characters like Dr. Manhattan or Silver Surfer and walked away with this thing. Furthermore, far weaker yet highly popular heroes like Spider-Man and Wolverine would never be contenders for the coveted title of Best of All Time, and yet they are [http://tinyurl.com...]. I’ll let readers check out who is listed as #1 on that link at their leisure. They actually used the same picture I did in Round 1 haha.
Thus, we must assume that powers constitute only a subset of hero greatness, meant to act more as entertainment devices and a source of personality illustration than a determinant of overall superiority. In that respect, Hulk is extremely limited. Hulk is big, hulk smashes. For those who like to see people smash things, he’s perfect. Superman, on the other hand, is much more diverse; he possesses not only the strength, endurance, intellect, stamina, immunities, and regenerative abilities Pro attributes to Hulk, but also a dozen other abilities which categorize him as a Class 17 on the Superhero Classification Database (Hulk is a Class 14) [http://tinyurl.com...].
Such diversity allows not only for more unique storytelling and battle sequences, but also a greater depth of character development unavailable to more single-minded heroes like Hulk. However, I would be remiss at this point not to establish, if only briefly for the sake of our readers, which of these two characters is physically superior:
Pro then argues that Hulk has no weaknesses. While this is normally the part where I’d show pictures of Hulk having been beaten by the likes of Spider-Man or Superman shrugging off a supernova to the face, that doesn’t matter anymore. I’ve already shown that power alone is not sufficient for this argument.
What does matter here is the fact that Pro never explained why not having weaknesses is a good thing. After all, comic books are meant to entertain, so writers must naturally include areas of difficulty and drama for their characters to overcome. The fewer avenues of conflict a hero can face, the more one dimensional their journey becomes. Once again, in this regard, the Hulk is sorely lacking. He either smashes or he doesn’t. He either calms down or he doesn’t. Whatever tricks his enemies may have up their sleeves, readers can be sure that at some point, Hulk will be punching something. Without weaknesses for his enemies to exploit, conflicts lose their sense of urgency and danger.
As Pro pointed out, Superman is indeed vulnerable to kryptonite, as well as magic, red sunlight, lead (in certain respects) and many other kinds of kryptonite, each with varying drawbacks. That alone, regardless of everything else, makes Superman an inherently more dynamic character. In the same way that a question with multiple answers is more complex than a question with only one, Superman’s weaknesses demand more character ingenuity, writer creativity, and reader comprehension.
Pro’s final arguments in favor of the Hulk deal with relatability, though he never elaborates on what exactly he is talking about. Both heroes acquired great power which they must now maintain in a world much more fragile than themselves. Both are also larger than life in almost every way (remember, he described Hulk as a super genius more powerful than Superman), meaning discussions on relatability must center more on the morals than the man.
Clark Kent is a man who strives to do good, inspire, and lead, despite battling rival forces and doing his best to understand a world in which he is a stranger. Bruce Banner, on the other hand, is a danger to himself and others, resigning himself to a life of running, isolation, and fear. Given that Pro described heroes as characters “we dream to be,” it is clear which one here is more relatable in terms of our desires for ourselves and humanity as a whole. The same is true in terms of the characters' everyday struggles, with Kent living to balance a career, a love life, and responsibilities to the greater good, while Banner spends his time concocting Hulk-killing serums and running from the government. Superman is recognized worldwide as the greatest hero of all time not only because of his great power, but also because of the almost poetic balance he strikes between achieving personal humanity and inspiring others to become greater than what they believe they can be.
Superman > Hulk
Pro has not made a case that Hulk is the greatest superhero of all time, but rather that he is superior to Superman. This is false. In fact, Superman is everything the Hulk isn’t. He has a variety of abilities whereas the Hulk has few. His stories revolve around overcoming diverse obstacles whereas the Hulk’s strategies are linear. He epitomizes what it means to be a hero whereas the Hulk is dangerously close to being a villain. Using Pro’s own standards on what constitutes greatness, the choice is clear: Superman is just damn super.
Napoleon_Dynamite_915 forfeited this round.
Extend all awesomeness.
Napoleon_Dynamite_915 forfeited this round.
Thanks for reading!
|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||6|