The Instigator
GriffinGonzales
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
SuperCapitalist
Con (against)
Winning
31 Points

iPods are taking the magic out of music.

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 8 votes the winner is...
SuperCapitalist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2010 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,297 times Debate No: 12804
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (8)

 

GriffinGonzales

Pro

Do you remember when to listen to music you had to actually but a CD in a Cd player? Remember how it was a special treat to listen to your favorite song or artist? How you had to listen to the radio for hours to get to that one song you wanted to hear?

Well that isn't the case today, because companies like Apple are mass producing affordable portable music players. The best example of this is the iPod. You can store over 40,000 songs on today's iPod. Don't you think that having so many songs at your fingertips kinda takes a bit of the magic out off listening to music? For instance; once upon a time you used to just sit and listen to music. Now you listen to it while jogging, while eating, while reading the paper, while doing homework. To be honost with you, I am listening to Belle of the Boulevard by Dashboard Confessional on my iPod as I write this. And sure enough, this song hasn't given me shivers like it did when I first heard it on the radio ever since it went on my iPod.
SuperCapitalist

Con

I thank my opponent for allowing me to debate this topic. I must negate the implied resolution "iPods take the magic out of music."

Let it be known that I am not limiting this debate to the iPod, but I will refer to that as a representative of the MP3 player.

My opponent starts off by talking about how special hearing your favorite song/artist was when you were required to use a CD player. However, why should iPods diminish this "specialty?" If you were so pressed to keep this so-called "magic" you would limit yourself to how many times you listened to a certain song. You are not bound by any means to listen to a song just because it's on your iPod. Also, if you wanted to go back to the days of when radio was popular, you would simply listen to the radio. I find that obvious.

TURN: The iPod gives more magic to music. This is because I can listen to it whenever I want. Also, of course a song won't be the same as it first was after you've heard it multiple times.
Debate Round No. 1
GriffinGonzales

Pro

first off I would like to better define "magic", by magic I mean the value you give to the time you spend listening to music.

When you can play any one of thousands of songs in just a click of a button, it devalues the time spent listening to that song because you don't have to actually work for it. You don't have to look through stacks of albums or wait for the radio to play the song you want. Also, the iPod has made listening to music a non-social event. You see people all the time with those white buds stuck in their ears; dousn't this get rid of the joy of listening to the music with friends and family?

My oponnent also stated that if you wanted to listen to the radio and alternative ways of listening to music, you still can. But I would argue that this option will not be around for long.Already radio stations are being put out of business and artists are no longer offering tangable albums or CD's because of the easy listening iPod and others provide.
SuperCapitalist

Con

I accept my opponent's definition. Let it be noted that it says "the time you spend listening to music." This excludes the work you had to do for it, only including the actual listening itself. Also, people don't want to have to work for music. Why is that any fun thing? It's not. I have stacks and drawers of CD's, and I hate going through them to find what I want. Also, I listen to much different music than my family, and they DON'T want to hear my music. When I'm jogging, neighbors don't want to hear Slipknot at 3 in the morning. And radio stations went out of business in the CD-player era, so this is non-unique. And what major artist isn't putting out physical copies of songs anymore? I personally have an iPod touch, and I still buy CD's. I actually bought three last night at a concert I went to. Also, note my opponent's use of the phrase "easy listening iPod and others provide." EXACTLY! I want it to be easy for me to listen to music. You ignore all the advantages I claim. Negate.
Debate Round No. 2
GriffinGonzales

Pro

First of all. My opponent seems to be pulling this debate in the direction of whether iPods are good or not. And that is not what the debate is about at all. I personally love my iPod. I think easy listening it great. But that is not what this debate is about. It is about whether or not the iPod takes value out of the time spent listening. I would say that it does simply because it makes it easier. Would you value a painting more if you had to paint it yourself? Yes. Would you value money more if you had to earn it yourself? Yes. And would you value the time you spend listening to music if you had to do more than just press a few buttons. I think yes.

My point here is that as easy as the iPod has made listening to music, it has also devalued it in our own eyes. It had taken away the rarity of music and thus has taken away a bit of the magic. Thank you---
SuperCapitalist

Con

Whether the iPod is good or not directly correlates to whether it takes value away from music. And the iPod devalues music because it makes it easier to listen to? TURN: People value music higher when it is easier to access. Personally, back in the CD era, I would want to ear a song, dig through my CD's, then stop half-way through because it was too much work for one song. The iPod solves that, thus adding value. And to attack his "painting" example: are you making the songs you listen to? No. So that example CANNOT be cross-applied because it uses a different sort of logic. And yes, it has "taken away the rarity of music." That's a good thing. Now I can actually hear WHAT I WANT TO HEAR! That certainly seems like no bad thing. Why do you try to convince me that hearing what I want is a bad thing? Also, extend my argument that those around DON'T want to hear music. Extend that people don't want to wok for music. Extend that I bought CD's last night. You have to vote Negative.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by SuperCapitalist 7 years ago
SuperCapitalist
Hahaha. Yeah, LD is a load of work, but I think it's worth it. And to be honest, I have no clue how parli works. And yeah, I do extemp too. Boring!
Posted by GriffinGonzales 7 years ago
GriffinGonzales
I was looking into trying to do LD, but it seemed a bit too much work for me to be honost :). Mostly I do i.e's like extemp and expos. But I'm trying my hand in debate for the first time and I thought I'd take it easy and go for parli. I'm not sure how it works in the rest of the states but in Oregon its bascially like six rounds with two minute long speeches. No evident is allowed either. So basically it's meant for lazy people who don't want to work.
Posted by SuperCapitalist 7 years ago
SuperCapitalist
Yea, Parliament is nation-wide. To be perfectly honest, the only two real forms of debate (or at least the two forms that are considered legit by every debater I know) are CX and LD. I have no interest in Parliament, PF, or Congress. If you haven't seen a round of either of those, search around on Victory Briefs Daily. And I'm from TX by the way. And yeah, no problem, I'm always glad to help a fellow debater. I'm a LD debater, so I think in a more philosophical manner. Hey, by the way, if you're against the iPod, and somebody says you should like the iPod because its newer technology, say your opponent commits an "Appeal to novelty" fallacy. This says that you're opponent assumes something is better because it is new or modern. A fallacy is an argument based on faulty or false logic. I know it sounds really weird and stupid, but people will be impressed if you can use fallacies. Anyways, I'll do a bit of research on this topic, and get back to you if I find anything useful for case ideas.
Posted by GriffinGonzales 7 years ago
GriffinGonzales
Hahaha I live in Oregon. And we have a form of debate called Parilementary Debate (I don't know if they have it anywhere else). Basically you can get anything from Abortion to Whether Mario is cooler than Sonic. It's pretty fun because you have to be ready for anything. Thanks for giving me some more contentions for Neg, I was really lacking enough to make a case out of. Now I just need to figure out what I'll do if I get proposition........
Posted by SuperCapitalist 7 years ago
SuperCapitalist
Where are you debating at??? I wanna debate this instead of nuclear weapons lol. But glad I could help :D. I would have actually made a Neg with evidence if the character limit wasn't 1,000.
Posted by GriffinGonzales 7 years ago
GriffinGonzales
That is kinda a rude comment. Expecially when I personally agree with the Con. I am going to debate this for real in a few weeks and I want to see what someone else can offer up for the con side of the debate. Luckily for me I got some good ideas from this.
Posted by SuperCapitalist 7 years ago
SuperCapitalist
Ouch.
Posted by Thorae 7 years ago
Thorae
People like you are the reason we don't technologically advance more than we could.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by hprulz 7 years ago
hprulz
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Grantarp 7 years ago
Grantarp
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by RDRitchey14 7 years ago
RDRitchey14
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by Jurn77 7 years ago
Jurn77
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Richardt 7 years ago
Richardt
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by SuperCapitalist 7 years ago
SuperCapitalist
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Vote Placed by GriffinGonzales 7 years ago
GriffinGonzales
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Thorae 7 years ago
Thorae
GriffinGonzalesSuperCapitalistTied
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