Login/Sign Up




Is it legitimate to judge a person based on their taste of music?
Music

paomo
Jul 29, 2010
14 votes
12 debaters
1
1
1
1


+ Add Argument

8
Yes, it is legitimate


lenodarkshine
Jul 31, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Absolutely. Music is a very personal way of expressing yourself - ergo if you have Celine Dion on repeat, and "that tune" from Titanic in particluar, socioligists have found, after comprehensive study that you are likely to:
A. Be a single female between the age of 39 and 55
B. Have a slight but noticeable moustache
C Enjoy curling up on the sofa in a dressing gown and eating a slab of chocolate the size of France
D Talk to cats
E Stand on a chair, with a fan in your face, pretending to be on the bow of the Titanic
F Break into tears sporadically
G Think that Judge Judy rocks.

Its THAT official.

 
vancam
Jul 29, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I would perhaps go further and suggest conviction and the death penalty for any Celine Dion fans.

 
bigwillie
Jul 31, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Is it permissible to judge a person solely on their music taste? Absolutely not. Musical preference is a small aspect of a human's personality, one that far more complex and multi-faceted than simple musical taste could imply.

However, taste in music still is an aspect of personality, an important one at that. It would be folly to judge a person on their musical preference and their musical preference alone, but one's musical taste should most certainly be taken into account when judging another person. After all, how can you be friends with someone whose musical tastes are in direct opposition to yours?

 
humchuckninny
Aug 01, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: paomo Show

For some reason, when I try to edit this post, it loses the spacing. I had to repost it so that it would not look like a huge, solid block of text. :)

 
humchuckninny
Aug 01, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: denverdannydee Show

denverdannydee makes an assumption in this argument that hardcore gangsta and booty rap is listened to by gangstas and pimps. Additionally, the assumption carries that those who like the message of black gospel music listen to black gospel music. However, the assumptions made here, if correct, actually support the affirmation of this debate.

To reword the argument made: If someone listens to hardcore gangsta and booty rap, to judge them is to say that they are gangstas or pimps. Since many of denverdannydee's friends listen to gangsta and booty rap, and since these friends are not gangstas or pimps, then it cannot be the case that we can judge someone to be a gangsta simply by their taste in music.

The problem made in this argument is twofold: First, it assumes that no other possibilities exist. It could be the case that I judge his friends to be exactly who they are based on their gangsta and booty rap. This is still a possibility, because denverdannydee has not provided a reason to reject a causal relationships between taste in music and judgment of character; he has only denied a correlation between the two.

Denying a correlation does not deny the causation, for there are near infinite correlations one can use to support or reject a theory. I can provide several counter-examples where I can judge my own friends based on the music they listen to. Without further development, my simple counter-example can carry as much weight as the example given here.

Second, there is an implicit assumption made that typically, gangsters or pimps listen to gangsta and booty rap. Additionally, that atheists do NOT listen to black gospel music. Otherwise the type of argument - one by counter-example - that denverdannydee tries to use becomes irrelevant to the topic. How else can this assumption be made, other than by a judgment?

To put it formally, If there is a gangsta, then they listen to gangsta rap. Form the contra-positive to get this: if they do not listen to gangsta rap, then they are not a gangsta. Either this implicit assumption is false, in which case the argument falls through entirely, or it is not false. If it is not false, then such a judgment must be legitimate. If such a judgment is legitimate, it actually upholds the other side of the debate.

 
humchuckninny
Aug 01, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: paomo Show

Paomo argues that in order to judge someone, we must be able to know something other than their taste in music FROM their taste in music. In other words, his argument is that music must be able to give us insight into other aspects to a person's personality in order for it to legitimately work as a way to judge someone.


I propose that the statement “In no way is someone's taste of music a legitimate way to judge them” is incorrect. As paomo's argument is in the form of an absolute and universal statement, I will simply show one instance in which case his statement is incorrect. If the statement is incorrect once, it is false, because if there is some way that a taste in music can be a legitimate way to judge someone, then it cannot be that there is no way someone's taste of music can be a legitimate way to judge someone.


But before I go on, it is necessary to define the criteria for a “legitimate” way to judge someone, whether it's music, clothes, driving habits, what have you. As this is not an area I wish to focus on, I will use a rather loose definition; feel free to toy around with it as you will. Something is considered a legitimate way to judge somebody if it coheres with the overall system of known beliefs.


Instance 1.) I am curious about Bob's character, and seek to judge him (whether good or bad). I talk to many associates of Bob, whom I trust, and learn that he is a truthful person. However, I want to know different parts of his character, not simply his integrity.


So I ask Bob himself how I can learn about his character, and he responds “just look at my CD collection; I have chosen certain music because I feel like it defines me as a person.” Knowing that Bob is a truthful person, I investigate his taste in music and create my own judgments about him.


This circumstance coheres with an overall system of known belief:


Two possibilities exist which would dissuade us from our overall system of known belief. A.) Bob intentionally deceived me, or B.) Bob unintentionally deceived me. However, it can be shown that our system of belief does not support either of these:


a.) The chances that Bob believed someone would ask him about his character and that he could deceive them with a CD collection are low. Lower still are the chances that Bob's associates would be unaware of Bob's deceptiveness, allowing them to misguidedly tell me that Bob is truthful. Therefore there is no legitimate reason Bob would intentionally deceive me.


b.) If Bob unintentionally deceived me, it would mean that he is unable to judge his own character. Should Bob be unable to judge himself with enough accuracy to link his character with his music, I would argue that it would be improbable that anyone could accurately judge Bob in any fashion – music related or not. For is we cannot give accurate depictions of ourselves to ourselves, there is no coherent way for us to give accurate depictions of others. I propose that due to the nature of the question, it is assumed that it is possible to judge others, and therefore it must also be possible to judge ourselves. Since Bob is able to judge his own character, it cannot be the case that Bob unintentionally deceived me.


To summarize: I know that Bob's taste in music can accurately reflect his own judgments about his character. Therefore, by observing his taste in music, I am able to legitimately make a judgment about Bob. Since I have shown that there is one possible circumstance under which one can legitimately judge a person based on their taste of music, Paomo's conclusion must be false.

 
humchuckninny
Aug 02, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: flayne Show

You seem not to understand the nature of a rebuttal. It is never my intent to make a direct reference to the question in this debate. A rebuttal simply refutes an argument; it does not need to support the affirmative side. Any aim to provide direct support for the side I argue on would not be done in a rebuttal, but would comprise of a new argument. Either way, you have either misunderstood paomo's conclusion or my argument against it. His conclusion implies a universal maxim. It doesn't matter what that universal maxim is - the fact that there is an example which disproves the maxim from being universal disproves the maxim entirely. I in no way argue that it is MORE or LESS legitimate, because paomo did not argue in that manner. In his conclusion, it was either ALWAYS or NEVER legitimate to judge someone based on their music tastes. Ad hominem attacks at the end will greatly discredit your argument at large, and most of the last half of your post becomes irrelevant to a rebuttal of my rebuttal.

 
massdebater
Aug 04, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
It certainly is legitimate to judge a person based on their taste of music. That is called free thinking, and if you don't support free thinking then you support dictatorship.

 
+ Add Argument

6
No, it is not legitimate


thales
Jul 29, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

Convict away, V.

But be warned: my heart will go on.

 
jonjax71
Jul 29, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Although what type of music a person likes can help make an intial impression of a person, it is not close to being a measuring stick of much validity

 
denverdannydee
Jul 30, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
many of my friends like to listen to hard core gangsta and booty rap but they are not either gangsters or pimps, back in high school I knew an atheist who liked black gospel music, he said it wasn't about the message it was the music he liked-he also listened to soul music

 
paomo
Jul 29, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
No, in no way is someone's taste of music a legitimate way to judge them.

Now first of all, we must understand that it is a possibility for someone's taste in music to not show anything else about that person. Having said that, this possibility alone justifies that it is not fair to judge someone based on their taste of music.

 
paomo
Jul 29, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

......

CELINE
DION
IS
A

LEGEND :)) !!!!

 
flayne
Jul 30, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
for a start, people intend to have their own reasons for liking a particular music genre. I myself like rock, but i like to listen to rock that has awesome guitarists in it and that compose different-awesome styles with their guitar playing, I don't intend to like rock for the words they sing. I hope that example clears things a bit. so I don't think we can judge a person by their preferred type of music, because they have their reasons for liking it, who are we to judge that reason? or to say for what reasons that is?

 
flayne
Aug 01, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: humchuckninny Show

all i see in your argument, is a counter to Paomo's argument, not a direct reference to the question in this debate, and correct me if i'm wrong but you seem to be implying that, it is legitimate to make "a" judgment (a single judgment) based on the possibility of someone such as this fictional character "Bob", deceiving you to look at his cd collection just so you can believe something about this person based solely on that particular CD collection.

(someone correct me if i'm wrong) from what i understand, this debate is about whether you can judge the "Complete" character of a person based on their music preference, not to make "a" judgment of a person, hence a single judgment of their personality. Of course you can make out a "single" aspect of the personality of someone based on what music they listen to, "that they like listening to that type of music", that's it.
as i said before, who are we to judge the person through the music they generally like to listen to?

what if someone likes multiple genres? can we still possibly judge them? How naive.



 
paomo
Aug 02, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: humchuckninny Show

Although, in that matter you are indeed correct, you are missing the big picture. I stated in my original argument that it isn't legitimate because there still remained a possibility that music had absolutely nothing to do with his/or her personality. All you stated was that there was a possibility that a person's taste in music COULD reflect on his/her personality. That is something i never denied.

What i was doing was putting emphasis on the fact that it is not always true. Lets say you meet a person for the first time. And lets say you just happen to notice that said person is listening to some heavy metal music. Now you may judge this person based on what he is listening to but then again there is the possibility of you being utterly wrong. Now because there is even a CHANCE of you being wrong, that already makes it not legitimate. You may say someone is lets say a bad person for listening to that music, although you are not basing it on actual logic. Logic would tell you that there still remains a possibility of said person not being a bad person just because he listens to metal. And Logic would tell you that people may have different tastes in music, so judging someone based on your opinion on the music they listened to is not a solid judgement, for while you may see the evil in metal music said person might see some sort of goodness in it. So seeing as your judgement is only based on opinion, it is therefore not legitimate.


To summarize: Throughout your argument, I noticed that the only thing you did was state a possibility. That in no way counters my argument at all because my argument stated (or was supposed to state) that the reason that it wasn't legitimate was because there is always a POSSIBILITY for you to be wrong. And, the subject of music is based on opinion, and seeing as people have different opinions, I do not see any way that this is a logical basis for judgement.

 
flayne
Aug 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: humchuckninny Show

okay then maybe i don't really get your rebuttal and it either wasn't clear enough or the example of "Bob" is not enough to make a firm rebuttal against paomo's argument, either way, let me try and make this clear.

through this example of "Bob" as a counter to paomo's argument, your saying that it isn't an ALWAYS or NEVER scenario, but that it depends on what the person discovers in the musical collection of another person, to make "a" reference to the owner's personality, therefore, the judgment made of that person linked to their preferred music isn't totally irrelevant. am i correct? if not then you probably need to simplify your argument a bit more or use a better example than "Bob".

however based on what your rebuttal suggests, I disagree with you and believe that it is NEVER legitimate to judge someone based on their musical preference due to what i said in my earlier posts.

 
frankiej4189
Aug 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
No but its perfectly legit to ridicule them to the point of tears if they listen to Ke$ha and Katy Perry

 
dkucera
Aug 05, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
No, it's not legitimate to judge someone based on their taste of music. That's like judging a book by it's cover. I agree that the music a person listens to will reflect the person. Someone who listens to jazz will most likely carry themselves much differently than to someone that listens to punk rock or something like that. But that's different than judging them based on their taste of music. That's like thinking that all football players are jocks or something like that- it's sterotyping.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

BBC beatles Britain guitar Hip Hop lennon mccartney Metal mp3 music people Pink Floyd queen radiohead Rap rap music huting blacks Rock song the beatles uk vancam