Random Debates

[bookworm]

On the tv show The Finder, two of the main characters often got into philosophical discussions comparing two seemingly random ideas or things. It reminded me of some of the threads we’ve had here in the past where people had just for fun debates about arbitrary topics. So, I decided to go ahead and bring their topics over here and let us make our own comparisons.

I’ve gone back through the episodes and taken down what they have compared, along with the arguments they gave on each side when available. I’ll post them, and then whoever wants to can present their own thoughts and points for whichever side they choose to take.

Each topic will last for one week, then we’ll move on to the next one. (Previous topics can still be debated after a new one is introduced if people want, that’s just to keep things moving and ensure we get to all of them.)

The first comparison will be posted next Monday.

[Whitty Whit]

Sounds interesting. I believe I can participate.

[bookworm]

Ninja
vs
Samurai

Which is better?

[Whitty Whit]

Samurai have a code of "honor" they live by per se.. Ninja ascribe to a "cult" if you will of "do whatever to gain the upper hand"... I suppose I would lean more to the ninja side because of the way they operate. Samurai were much more honorable and respected by society. Depending on the "morality" if you will of a person, they could choose either one. One without scruples would probably choose the ninja, and one with scruples would most likely choose samurai.

[bookworm]

I have actually had a change of position on this one. In previous debates I had always sided with samurai regardless of who they were matched against, but while analyzing this comparison I couldn’t recall why so this time I have to go with ninja. They are legendary for their discipline and skill, and while samurai have tradition and respect, when it comes down to it ability is more important.

[Whitty Whit]

I have actually had a change of position on this one. In previous debates I had always sided with samurai regardless of who they were matched against, but while analyzing this comparison I couldn’t recall why so this time I have to go with ninja. They are legendary for their discipline and skill, and while samurai have tradition and respect, when it comes down to it ability is more important.

I agree. I think that's the overall "thing" I wanted to portray, but didn't know exactly how to put it. Thank you.

[bookworm]

Drowned Kitten
vs
Fat Girl Smoking

Which is sadder?
Which is more depressing?

Arguments:

“Depressing is a matter of personal taste, whereas sad is universal. Drowned kitten is sadder, fat girl smoking is more depressing.”

[Whitty Whit]

I believe that the drowned kitten is saddening. The fat girl I do not believe is depressing because I choose not to be depressed. I would be disgusted at the fact that she is fat and smoking, but not depressed.

[bookworm]

I agree with the argument differentiating between sad and depressing, but not the conclusion. I would say drowned kitten is both sadder and more depressing. Fat girl smoking is just off-putting.

[Whitty Whit]

Eh. in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.

[bookworm]

Optimist
vs
Fool

Which is more content?

[American Eagle]

This reminds me of Controversy Tuesdays long ago.

I think a fool is more content but I'm too lazy to debate it at this time.

[bookworm]

As a pessimist, I believe that optimist and fool are synonyms, rendering this comparison moot.

But seriously, it’s an interesting question. I think it depends on what extend the optimism and the foolishness are embodied. A true optimist, living the state to the fullest extent, is most likely just as content as a true fool, living that state to the fullest extent, because they would both be oblivious to anything to the contrary.
The area an advantage would be given in would be if one of them was not quite achieving either total optimism or total foolishness. In that case, the optimist would have occasional moments of insight where he would realize the world isn’t actually as bright as he holds it to be, causing him to lose contentment, and likewise the fool would have occasional moments of insight where he would realize he is foolish, causing him to lose contentment. Between those two situations, I would say the most content would be the fool. Because a fool realizing he is foolish can do something about it, and in doing so reattain contentment. An optimist realizing he is too optimistic may give in to a feeling of helplessness and never be able to regain that carefree contentment he once had.

[Whitty Whit]

An optimist does not mean "keep wanting better things". An optimist wishes to see the good side of something bad. They can be content in the bad situation if they can not do anything to change it. Contentedness does not mean that we cannot do anything to change our circumstances. A fool just refuses to do anything about a situation.

[bookworm]

An optimist wishes to see the good side of something bad. They can be content in the bad situation if they can not do anything to change it.

They can, but they may not. Sometimes there just isn’t a good side, no matter how optimistic one is. When faced with a situation like that, it could be so jarring to the optimist that they are unable to processes it and are then irreparably damaged, precluding a return to complete contentment.

A fool just refuses to do anything about a situation.

Not necessarily, that was what I was trying to get at.
If they are a true fool, they are completely and genuinely unaware that there is anything they could be doing differently. As such, they are perfectly content. But as I said if they are not completely foolish, then they will occasionally become aware of their foolishness. At that time, they either do nothing, as you suggest, or they take action on what they realize. If they do the latter, then upon taking care of what they found they return, for at least a time, to the original state of oblivion, and therefore of contentment.

[Jehoshaphat]

I believe a fool, fools care about nothing while optimists always look higher and usally their ideas fall flat leaving them less content.

[bookworm]

Duty
vs
Honor

Which is more important to adhere to?

[Jehoshaphat]

Honor, if you are not honorable you will have no duties because duties require honor.

[bookworm]

This is a tough one to call. It depends on a lot of factors.
Ideally, fulfilling duty would bring honor, so you wouldn’t have to choose between the two. But in a case where it has to be one or the other, it’s really, really tough to say which is more important. It depends on circumstances.
Depending on what duty you were submitting to, that could certainly be more important. Doing something that may seem to bring dishonor, but you had to do because it was your duty. In the military for example, adhering to duty is a must.
On the other hand, if the duty you’re expected to follow isn’t extremely vital, then honor could be more important to adhere to in that there aren’t really severe consequences for rejecting your duty, so preserving honor is the more preferable.
So it definitely depends on each individual situation, but I have to pick a side for this, so I’ll go with duty. As I said, in ideal situations duty and honor aren’t mutually exclusive so it gets a point there, and in times you have to choose one I can think of more scenarios where duty would be the more important so I give it the point there.

[Woody]

This is honestly a hard one to call. But I seem to gravitate more towards duty. But it really depends on the situation, like you said, bookworm. But if it was a situation where duty and honor are equally important, and I had to choose only one, I would probably go with duty.