The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
5 Points

Books are better than Television

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 921 times Debate No: 98789
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




television rots your mind.when you are watching television you are not utilizing your mind . you are just absorbing things fed to you. not only that but you kill creativity , vocabulary , and problem solving skills by not encouraging reading , almost all the movies are made from books and in all cases the books are much better than the movies . the joy of reading a book has no bounds , you will only understand it when you read a book willingly with your whole mind concentrating into it i say books are better than television! who agrees with me are probably most educated people alive .. thank you


Television sharpens your critical thinking skills according to many psychologists. Thus television does not "rot" your brain, it depends on how many hours you watch it and how old you are. If you watch more than 8 hours of TV a day and you are a child, then TV can have an adverse effect on your brain. But there have been no reported cases of children watching more than 8 hours of TV every day. Television is a form of "passive learning" which is where students receive information often through some form of memorization or rote learning. Many teachers and psychologists claim that passive learning is the most efficient way of teaching since it reduces the time and mental effort and it can equip people with a better task representation, making them more effective active learners in the process. Meaning that watching television is more effective than reading in some ways when you want to learn.

There are no reported cases that television kills creativity, vocabulary, and problem-solving skills by not encouraging reading. Movie releases actually encourage children to read the books they're based on; just by looking at The Hunger Games, The Lorax, and The Maze Runner, you can see a huge spike in readership the month the movie was released.

The joy of television has no bounds; television can cure or aid in curing Situational Depression according to many psychologists. In Holistic Sleep: Beating Insomnia With Commonsense, Medical, and New Age Techniques, a lady was mourning the death of her husband and couldn't sleep until the doctors moved a TV into her room, which comforted her and helped in curing her long-term depression. It is also important to note that based on the votes of 500,917 people, 68% would rather watch a movie rather than read a book.

Books are better than the movies they are based on? That seems like a very subjective topic, but I can name numerous movies that are better than the books they are based on including Dr. Strangelove, Children of Men, Fight Club, The Godfather, No Country for Old Men, and that's just to name a few.
Debate Round No. 1


In television you watch a movie and you have it in your mind by looking at the screen and observing what others do or act but through books you create your own world where you imagine and make your own library in you. You said that television is better? Well have you ever read books? As you speak it looks like you talk with no proper education and self support from books. I have a friend who watches television for 3 hours everyday and she has no good vocabulary plus she watches only educational movies and fun facts but has she gone high in her vocabulary? She hasnt but i read 6 books a day and comparing me and her guess who has the most educated vocabulary? Obviosly its the one who reads the books.i have seen many complains on children watching too much television. I see them in a serious illness and i have seen many parents report against television and i see you are a person who loves watching movies.well its not bad..without books there would be no movies!and u said that the movie is more better than the book.i agree but you think , one author wrote a book( which is intresting) but the movie is better.have you thought about how many people it took to cast the movie ? A lot if people got together and did it but the author wrote it ALONE. I have ask all the adults and they have agreed against television.books: you see words and you take a good look at it and you read it plus you imagine what happens . I have been selected to debating tournaments and every person i see there has been reading books but non of them have been watching so much movies like you said probably you are a t.v. Lover and as i see you dont enjoy reading plus i dont care what you say.. No adults do agree with your oppinion! I ask everyone what is more educating and every single person has my answer ! You havnt enjoyed reading and thats nothing to blame me or anyone else about.. thank you!


Since you didn't respond to any of my arguments and babbled on incoherently about how stupid I am, I'll respond to what you wrote.

Based on your response, reading books vastly decreases your ability to put a coherent sentence together with correct grammar and spelling.

"As you speak it looks like you talk with no proper education and self support from books." Very hypocritical and grammatically incorrect, you forgot to add the comment after "speak" and the hyphen after "self."

The only point you made was that I was not educated, which is incorrect. Please point out any grammatical or spelling error that I made; because I can show you dozens of spelling and grammatical errors that you made.

I will ask my opponent to respond to my previous arguments.
Debate Round No. 2


okay you say i am not educated? people who read books are more educated than the people who watch television.Show me someone among us who has not spent a guilty afternoon binge-watching TV and mainlining Cheetos, and I will show you a liar. No matter how much we like to feed our brains and stimulate our senses , sometimes we must needs take a vegetation-vacation.
It"s a doubly big temptation, because over the years TV has gone from being home to low-rent entertainment wherein cops chase robbers, to a place where thoughtful, cinematic storytelling thrives. But for all its charms, TV will never be books. Here are 7 ways that books are better than TV:

1. A Book Is Unique. Sure, every person who picks up a copy of the same book is going to read the same plot, but thanks to the powers of our respective imaginations, while I might picture purple trees, you might picture gray. While I might picture Michael Keaton as the leading man, you might picture Gerard Butler. When you read, you engage with your inner life in a way you can"t with television.

2. A Book Can REALLY be Paused. In theory, a TV show can be paused, provided you"ve got a DVR or watch everything on your laptop. But you can put down a book whenever you want, and you don"t need a special box to do it. You don"t have to stay up all night in fear of missing something (though some of us do anyway), because come morning, you can pick right back up where you left off.

3. A Book Has No Reruns"Unless You Want Them. When you pick up a new book, you never have to hold your breath and keep your fingers crossed that it isn"t a book you"ve already read. You"re always guaranteed a new adventure"unless you want to revisit your favorite story, in which case, it"s just as easy and far less full of commercials.

4. A Book Is Always 3D, Without The Hassle of Glasses. I don"t know about you, but as a person who wears glasses, nothing is more irritating than having to precariously perch a pair of fancy-schmancy 3D specs on top of them. Guess what doesn"t require 3D glasses for an all-encompassing experience? A book, y"all.

5. Like Red Bull, a Book Gives You Wings. In the immortal words of the Reading Rainbow theme song, "butterfly in the sky, I go fly twice as hiiiiigh!" But reading doesn"t just to take you to places you might not go (like SPACE!), it also starts conversations with strangers who, seeing what you"re reading, might become friends. I"ve struck up more conversations with groovy, reading strangers than with any other people. And if you"ve got a book handy, you"re never alone. Want to try out that new restaurant but all yours peeps are busy? Take your newest book, order it fries, and then don"t share those fries! This is a party.

6. A Book Is A Secret Language. You may not be able to judge a book by its cover (debatable), but I"ve judged more than my fair share of folks based on what they"ve read. I knew one of my "bosom companions" was going to be just that when she used the phrase""bosom companion." Lucy Maude Montgomery for life, you guys.

7. A Book Is Meant To End. Even the best TV shows get worse and worse, as they go on and on. TV shows are designed to fight against their own inevitable ends by their very nature. A book begins with a story to tell, and ends once it"s through. Even if the story is epic enough that it extends A Song of Ice and Fire"style, every author comes to you with a beginning, a middle, and a reassuring end. well, as you said "reading books vastly decreases your ability to put a coherent sentence together with correct grammar and spelling."
when you read a book you can correct your grammar by looking at it and at least making a little effort but television just makes you lazy so i prove you wrong!
thank you


Again, you didn't respond to any of my arguments.

1. Your argument is also your rebuttal, while TV and movies give you a whole picture with all the details, books often leave readers in uncertainty. When you look at a movie like Forrest Gump and compare it to the book, the book tries too hard to be funny and comes across over-the-top and unamusing while the movie strikes a perfect balance through the humor and the uplifting message, just one example of the movie being more unique than the book.

2. This argument was baseless and meaningless. You don't need a laptop to pause a TV show; you can leave it paused for however long you want, and it will still be there in the morning just like a book. All you have to do is get Netflix and pay $7.99 a month; that's nothing to you! You buy six books a day! Since the average book costs $27, you pay around $162 a day!

3. Another absurd argument, I can't count the times that I have lost my bookmark, having to search for the page I was on for such a long time. But when I'm on Netflix, I don't have to search, I just press "resume," and I'm right where I left off.

4. This argument is purposeless; you don't have to wear 3D glasses to watch a movie.

"Guess what doesn"t require 3D glasses for an all-encompassing experience? A book, y"all."
Are you implying that you need 3D glasses to watch every movie? Because that is flat-out incorrect, even if a movie is in 3D, (which is incredibly rare nowadays, you can see the movies that are 3D are steadily dying out), you can choose to watch it in 2D, no one is making you watch movies in 3D.

5. You've struck up countless conversations with strangers about books; this is your word against mine, the person who said she reads six books a day. But let's just assume you're telling the truth this time! Facebook analyzed the most common conversation topics -- and there was not one book on there -- but there were many TV shows on there bringing people together such as The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones.

6. This was nonsensical; I honestly have no idea what she was trying to achieve with this argument.

7. This argument was meaningless and fallacious. Are you implying that TV shows don't end or don't have good endings?
Because it is incredibly more common for a book series to get canceled rather than a TV series -- only .2% of authors get published today, while more than 80% of new shows get a second season.
TV shows not having good endings is another extremely subjective topic, but I can state countless TV shows with fantastic endings including Justified, Friday Night Lights, Breaking Bad, Battlestar Galactica, and Six Feet Under.

Please don't take what I wrote out of context, by leaving out "Based on your response" on "Based on your response, reading books vastly decreases your ability to put a coherent sentence together with correct grammar and spelling." You make it sound like I actually believe that instead of me just making a joke.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ChadIrvin 2 years ago
RFD -- Con started out by basically calling those who watch television as dumb. Beginning a debate by insulting people isn't too smart. I was hoping she would change her tune in the later rounds, but unfortunately she did not. Better conduct, therefore,goes to pro.

Con's spelling and grammar wasn't up to par with pro's. It's difficult to read a long argument when the writer doesn't use paragraphs. I tend to get bored and I started getting "lazy eye" from trying to read it. Points go to pro for the spelling and grammar.

Pro's arguments were better than con's. I gave him points in this area because con's arguments seemed to focus on television watchers as dumb. Pro had a little more tact in this area.

Neither used sources and therefore I left that tied.

I strongly believe that books and reading are beneficial to brain power, but I also don't believe that television will rot your brain, especially if viewing decent material.
Posted by lua 2 years ago
180 days? Why did I agree to do this?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ChadIrvin 2 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.