frame

StarTrek will not be the same without Gene Roddenberry

Opening Argument

agsragsr 633 Pts
edited November 2017 in TV SHOWS
Original StarTrek series and Next Generation were the best StarTrek series. Gene Roddenberry was a great visionary, and many of his concepts came true. Since that, there were a number of attempts to revive the franchise, but none came close and likely will never will.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Roddenberry
CuriousGeorgeaarongjoecavalry
Live Long and Prosper

Debra AI Prediction

Against
Predicted To Win
61%
Likely
39%
Unlikely

Details +


Points For:

24


Points Against:

23



Votes: 5

Rounds: 3

Time Per Round: 1 Hour Per Round

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Voting


Arguments

  • Round 1 | Position: For
    If you look at the series created by Gene Roddenberry and compare it with other series, such as Voyager and the ohers, you can see how much better th older versions were.
    Live Long and Prosper
  • Round 1 | Position: Against
    While I fully agree that Gene Roddenberry was a visionary creator of the series, I think that the series has done nicely without him as well.  He only created some of the initial episodes of the Next Generation, and that series has taken off without him.  Deep Space Nine was also really amazing, and that was done without Gene.
    Finally, the later series leveraged better technology and graphics to compensate for Gene’s lack of his visionary thinking.
    CuriousGeorge
  • Round 1 | Position: Against
    While original series was original for that time, the later series continues to adopt to evolving times and were also great.  The newer series were written by talented writers and are as good as the original.
    islander507
  • Round 1 | Position: For
    There have been other decent Star Trek series, but they were written by people who grew up with Gene Roddenberry's original work and were inspired by it.  If it weren't for Roddenberry, the spin-offs would never have been made.
    agsrCuriousGeorge
  • Round 2 | Position: Against
    The "Pro" side introduced the notion that Gene Roddenberry's visionary thinking was the key to making great StarTrek series.  
    Also introduced idea that Gene influenced other writers to follow his foot steps and create great Star Trek series. I'd like to address these points.

    1) Roddenberry's shows were not as popular as newer shows that were made without him and mostly without his influence.  Acdording to two sources Voyager and TNG were more popular than TOS.

    https://nerdist.com/star-trek-netflix-most-rewatched/

    http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

    2) yes, we couldn't have startrek spinoff without Gene Roddenberry, but that wasn't the debate.  The debate is if we can make great Star Trek series without him.  His inspiration stays on, but more popular shows were made since without him.
    CuriousGeorge
  • Round 2 | Position: Against
    Another source that lists star trek series by popularity, demonstrates that Deep Space 9 is top pick.  That was appoved by Gene Roddenberry, but not created by him. 
    http://www.vulture.com/article/star-trek-every-tv-show-ranked-worst-to-best.html

    The inspiration of Star Trek was important  as  stated by @CYDdharta

    I certainly have respect for his legacy, but he created something bigger than himself and other writers created even more popular series based on that insipiration.
    islander507
  • Round 2 | Position: For
    I acknowledge the sources that show that the original series were not as popular as the followup series.  However, we need to look at that as a function of time.  The newer series took advantage of the already established StarTrek user base and expanded on that viewership.  The newer series also upgraded tehnology to appeal more to newer generations.  Given that Roddenberry's series are still very popular today, so many years later, and were so groundbreaking for that time - I would argue that it makes it a better creation overall.  His series created a foundation for the other series. We cannot claim that for any of the spinoffs.
    CuriousGeorge
    Live Long and Prosper
  • Round 2 | Position: For
    The original Star Trek spawned an entire TV genre.  Prior to Star Trek, the closest thing to a Sci Fi series on US network television was the Twilight Zone.  Star Trek was the first with a recurring cast that took place entirely in outer space.
    agsrCuriousGeorge
  • Round 3 | Position: Against
    @CYDdharta
    and @agsr, you both made great arguments, pivoting your debate on the fact that Original series was visionary for it's time and spawned of other ideas.  However, that still doesn't address the point that subsequent series were more popular than the orginal while made without Roddenberry.  An objective measure of how good a series is based on popularity, and multiple sources were provided to demonstrate popularity of the various series.
    Great debating with you, and since it's final round, I look forward to the votes.
    agsr
  • Round 3 | Position: For
    My definition of "better" is not measured by popularity many years later compared to more recent series. That wouldn't be a fair Comparison.  Popularity needs to be normalized for how much time has passed, as there is always bias towards more recent content.
    The very latest episode of the current TV show will normally get more hits than an older episode.  
    Better should be measured by how much impact it made on the society and forward.  TOS did that. It created generations of fans, spin offs, and prototypes of future techology that wasn't even concievable at that time.

    In conclusion, I attribute all of that to the StarTrek creator, Gene Roddenberry, who both created the show, and inspired future generations of writers, innovators,  and fans. 















    CuriousGeorge
    Live Long and Prosper
  • Round 3 | Position: Against
    I like to stay with the facts. The original series was great, and Roddenberry did a great job.  However, the subsequent series were better as measured by popularity. 

  • Vote
    edited November 2017
    Persuasive Argument (For): 3 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 0 Points
    Conduct (For): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 2 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 2 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 2 Points
    Conduct (Against): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 2 Points

    Total Points (For): 7 Points

    Total Points (Against): 8 Points

    Explanation: I enjoyed this debate and both sides did a nice job articulating their point of view.  I also enjoyed this brand new DebateIsland formalish debate format - nice job on that!
    arguments:
    While both sides did well, I award an extra point to the Pro.  That side made a point that "better" is a function of time and spin offs, not just total ratings.

    sources:
    the con side did better job, citing 3 relevant sources, where pro had none.

    conduct and spelling was good on both sides.
    Live Long and Prosper
  • Vote
    edited November 2017
    Persuasive Argument (For): 0 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 0 Points
    Conduct (For): 0 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 0 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 0 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 0 Points
    Conduct (Against): 0 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 0 Points

    Total Points (For): 0 Points

    Total Points (Against): 0 Points

    Explanation: The original series was widely regarded by critics and raters as one of the best, if not the best, and the most influential Sci Fi series of all time;
    http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/lists/40-best-science-fiction-tv-shows-20160526/the-twilight-zone-1959-1964-20160524
    https://www.amazon.com/TIME-Star-Trek-Influential-Science/dp/1683304357
    http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/10-best-sci-fi-tv-shows-ever-written

    The only Star Trek series that some critics consider better is Star Trek: The Next Generation, a series that Roddenberry was also involved in creating.
    https://screenrant.com/best-science-fiction-tv-series/
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/culture/movies/g156/the-50-greatest-sci-fi-tv-shows/?slide=48


    He was the first TV writer with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, and he was later inducted by both the and the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences Hall of Fame, accomplishments that very few, if any, others have been able to match.



    Bah, the time limits on this debate were too constraining. 

  • Vote
    Persuasive Argument (For): 0 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 0 Points
    Conduct (For): 0 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 0 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 0 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 0 Points
    Conduct (Against): 0 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 0 Points

    Total Points (For): 0 Points

    Total Points (Against): 0 Points

    Explanation: No compelling arguments or sources really on either side
     
  • Vote
    Persuasive Argument (For): 3 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 2 Points
    Conduct (For): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 2 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 3 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 1 Points
    Conduct (Against): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 2 Points

    Total Points (For): 9 Points

    Total Points (Against): 8 Points

    Explanation: For made great arguments which included good evidence and sources, good spelling and grammar, persuasive arguments, and had very good conduct. 1 more point went to for. Great job all Debaters, but especially @agsr !
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • Vote
    Persuasive Argument (For): 3 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 1 Points
    Conduct (For): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 2 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 1 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 2 Points
    Conduct (Against): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 2 Points

    Total Points (For): 8 Points

    Total Points (Against): 7 Points

    Explanation: My rationale is as follows:
    persuasive arguments: pro did a better job explaining that it's not about just the popularity ratings.
    sources: cons did a nice job, and I awarded extra points to them.
    conduct and spelling:
    good for both sides
    WhyTrump - a good question
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch