Rock 'n' roll, is better than rap music.

First, let me begin by saying that both numerical proof would be accepted, and theoretical proof, would be accepted.

Now, on to my opening statement. Though I do believe rap is a form of art, I wouldn't define it as music. Music is defined as ---

1 a: the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b: vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony

2 a: an agreeable sound : euphony <her voice was music to my ears> b: musical quality <the music of verse>

3: a musical accompaniment <a play set to music>4: the score of a musical composition set down on paper5: a distinctive type or category of music <there is a music for everybody — Eric Salzman>

http://www.m-w.com...

I shall refer to definition 1 as the definition applying to this argument. You may say "Wait a second, rap has distinctive beats and tones, and continuity" Alas, it doesn't. Though most rapists DO include a steady beat for the background, the MAIN instrument in the arrangement is their voice. Clearly, rappers do not sing. They are merely talking in rhythm. So, I would define rap, as poetry.

I shall await a rebuttal from whoever chooses to accept this argument.

Salve, Zeldafan69. Thanks for posting this debate. I look forward to a good one.

I fully accept and agree to the first definition of music, as provided by you from www.m-w.com above, as being our common, explicit, and exclusive guide during the debate: "1 a: the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b: vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony"

1)"Though I do believe rap is a form of art, I wouldn't define it as music."

-This is clearly untrue, as we are debating a resolution you titled (oddly enough) "Rock 'n' roll, is better than *rap music*." Whether this was intentional or not, you obviously think of rap as music, at least subconsciously.

2)"Though most rapists DO include a steady beat for the background, the MAIN instrument in the arrangement is their voice. Clearly, rappers do not sing. They are merely talking in rhythm. So, I would define rap, as poetry."

-According to our definition of "music," rap is clearly music. Rap clearly meets, by your own admission, the minimum requirements to be music, as it is, at the very least, "a vocal sound having rhythm."

3)"You may say 'Wait a second, rap has distinctive beats and tones, and continuity' Alas, it doesn't."

-How exactly is that? Any line of reasoning or empirical evidence, or theoretical or numerical proof, as you call it, to support this claim? For the text immediately succeeding this, which I quoted in point 2, has nothing to do with this concept. Rap does have "distinctive beats and tones, and continuity." I lay upon the reader that this is self-evident.

4)Even ignoring the first three points, which invalidated everything you argued in Round 1, we are debating a resolution to which the answer can only be an individual subjective judgement. Better to *whom*? You or I or Ted may all prefer rock to rap, but liking one genre of music more than another does not equate to it being "better" than another genre. The same would be true of the converse, as well as any other similar comparison: "Rap is better than country," "Jazz is better than folk," etc.

You being the PRO and the instigator I would say the burden of proof is clearly on you, and you have a ways to go.

Back to you
Britt

Well, my arguments stand. xyxyxyxyxyxxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxx

Well, I suppose that's it. 100 characters 100 characters 100 characters 100 characters 100 characters

Peace
Britt