Jazz music is better than classical music

Please excuse how late my reply came. Sudden unexpected increases in workload and difficulty at my job rendered me tired and utterly uninterested in debating leaving only this makeshift, short opening argument and rebuttal. I'll try to provide a faster answer without making promises and expand better on my points. I accept the debate and will argue against the notion that classical music is objectivly better than Jazz. My stance is such that for the resolution to be valid it must hold in each and every case and that the two genres will be judged and compared not based upon objective means but on the subjective, ever changing norms and viewpoints of whomever is asked. In order for Jazz music to be better I need to find but one person that believes that it is better; a single person for which the resolution hold. In addition I'll mark off some objective arguments and show the flaw in the logic of my opponent. First of all we need to establish what 'better' means in this context. The general definition and the one I'll be using for the remainder of the debate is “Better[adj]: being more desirable, preferable or optimal of two items”. What is in fact desirable or preferable is not a fixed scale. What I find desirable might be your nightmare and such for any resolution in the form “<a> is better than <b>” without a third criteria <c> for which the comparison is to be base upon there will always be a person <x> that will either affirm or refute the premise based on his own axioms which are and will be logically consistent and valid within his own range of experiences. So, in order to start off this debate let's start a small logical deduction to demonstrate this. Let us thusly assume that a person x exists so that x prefers the musical genre Jazz over Classical Music for reasons that are consistent but in reality not relvevent to the conclusion we are trying to draw. Under the reasoning x provides we will be able to see that the resolution holds for x and more importantly cannot be refuted or denied with any logical axioms for the limited set of all persons {x that believe a>b}, if we take a psuedo mathmatical route to this. Because this set must, statistically, include at least one member for the resoultion “jazz>Classical” the resolution is affirmed. In addition we can perhaps strike upon if perhaps some of the more jazz coordinated geniuses may have gotten part of their creativity, or maybe led to jazz from it. A certain study[0] showed a link between creativity, being more active musically and have a greater number of musical projects under the belt at any given time than their classical loving counterparts. This might suggest that when it comes to honing, sharpening or maintaining an active musical 'lifetime' Jazz is already showing itself to be a strong candidate, and why shouldn't it be, for it does undoubtedly allow its lovers to express themselves in better and more accesable ways than classical music can. One of the key elements of Jazz, the ill definable genre, is improvisation and a free flow of melody and rhythm that might change key or shift a key or two. A musician performing a jazz piece is allowed to break row and show his skill and creative fast-thinking. A classical performer has but little wiggle room for such improvisations and while they do exists they are much rarer and farther between, meaning that a classical performer might not get many chances to express himself or further his creative pursuits. However, my opponents opening arguments strike, or try to strike, a more objective route stating that classical music is the older genre and thus must be the better genre. This is a form of the “appeal to tradition” fallacy which states that something is old and thus that it is good. Following this chain of logic my opponent must concede to the point that Didgeridoo music (aboriginal australian tribal music)[1] is better than classical music; and that most forms of tribal music[2] and the ever-haunting tones of Gregorian Chanting[3]. I have nothing against any of these musical forms, but for my opponent to be able to maintain the notion that classical music is better for the sake of age alone all these genres are, by default and without argument, also in turn better than classical music is and will be along with literally any musical form, of which are thousands, that existed before the classical era, from which the genre draws the name, began. My opponent then states that classical music draws its superiority from the possible range of instruments. This again is an extremely narrow viewpoint to have considering that the number of instruments does not affect a genre, that induvidual artists can break from tradition and perform the metrics and laws pertaining to each genre within reasonable bounds and thus expanding the range of instruments to near infinity. For the second flaw in this argument is the notion that for some reason more instruments are to equal a better genre. If we just take a book from classical music we see plenty of beautiful melodies and concertos, etudes and sonatas that rely on a single instrument and in fact are more likely to sound off if we add instruments to fill into the range that the genre is supposed to allow. Chopin's Nocturne f.i are a great example of a classical piece (written in the romantic era) that only requires a single instrument, the versatile Piano. My opponent has to fully argue and subsidize (a bit out of definition) why a larger range of instruments is better and why this does not make film scores some of the greatest musical pieces of all times seeing how they literally utilize every single instrument they can find in order to capture that perfect tone for their films. As we can perhaps see from this first opening statements which we will further dive into in later rounds Jazz is not only semantically better for certain people being surveyed, but additionally give those performing additional freedome and power to create, to use their skill to express their moods and thoughts into the music which the classical performer is not always or often allowed to do. We see that a classical performer is not as active as the jazz player and we see that neither of my opponents opening arguments hold. On those notes I pass the ball back to my opponent and await further arguments. 0]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... 1] 2] 3]