azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Vampire Diaries Vs. Twilight
Side: Twilight

i love twilight! i was so obsessed with the books and the movies. i would stay up late just to read what came next in the books even if it got me in trouble. i have never seen the vampire diaries but i am willing to give them a shot. but mean while i all for twilight! team Edward all the way!
Debate: Vampire Diaries Vs. Twilight
Side: Twilight

The statistics don't lie. Twilight is immensely popular in mainstream.
Debate: Vampire Diaries Vs. Twilight
Side: Vampire Diaries

So? Just because one has more views doesn't make it better. It just means teens, who can barely express their emotions and deal with their immature problems, turn to the movie to 'experience' something they are lacking in their lives through the characters they are watching. And, to top it off, some (not all-I'm not fond of generalizing) teen girls watching these are more shallow than a kiddy-pool...
Debate: Vampire Diaries Vs. Twilight
Side: Twilight

I think that the Twilight is better, because in Vampire Diary, a lot of people know about their secret, and they can bite everyone just because they couldn't control them self, However in Twilight they try to keep their secret. they control them self. They have a rules, which they should strongly follow. And Love... In my opinion Love between Edward and Bella more romantic. they try to overcome a lot of problem and by overcoming this problem they show how strong their love.So as for me i prefer more Twilight than Vampire's diary
Debate: Vampire Diaries Vs. Twilight
Side: Vampire Diaries

I completely disagree. Their love is based solely on LUST! When I look at them, I see Romeo and Juliet with a somewhat happy ending. Bella is young, and most likely falls for Edward because she's awed by the fact he cares for her even though, in her opinion, she's 'plain Jane'. Steph Meyer tried to give their romance depth, but I believe she failed at it, unfortunately. I do, however somewhat agree with you on the rules principle, but here, it's Damon who kind of broke them to begin with. Most of the other vampires tried to remain off the radar.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Art is something which has its soul and history. Everything which is created by artist is never considered as a joke or childishness, in my opinion. Artist when doing something showing his version of world or just showing his impressions about it. As for modern art is nowadays trends and leak of life I guess. If now we consider someones works as a childishness job and do not see there something which is hided than we can blame only ourselves. Modern art is showing high technique in drawing or even constructing, because there is a lot of spheres and things which we can count as an art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

So you mean that if a random crazy guy who considers himself as an artist soils a paper and call it an art, we should accept it as a real masterpiece and treat him as new Rafael?
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Actually I am not saying that you have to call him Rafael or cosider it as a masterpiece, but we don't really know why and how he made it. Because in every creature there is a mative, as a example we do not always understand hard roch or the use of archestra. So far we might not think as that person does and there might be people who like and there will be special audience for his work. That audience may get it as it is their masterpiece, and as for others it won't be.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Don't you think that people sometimes accept such kind of art just not to look stupid? For example, they consider Dali as a god of surrealism while they still do not understand. They think that if they disagree, others will call them ignoramuses. Where do you stand on that?
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I think that art is something that you should feel, but it isn't necessary to understand. Of course, if you don't feel anything when you see the pictures of this modern artist you shouldn't treat him as "new Rafael". But probably for some people it is a real art because they can feel it deeply.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

so I didn't get your point?! Could you clearify it or explain in other words, if it is not hard?
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I mean that it is up to everybody. Every person has their own perception of what to consider as art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

i understand the point of Aigerim. We consider the art as the direction to express your feelings. And if you can iyou create an art. and it is not depends on the time you spent to create picture or sculpture. It is depend on HOW you create it.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Cool!! I agree with you?? Every person could take a piece of paper, paint and start to draw different things, which nobody could understand.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

And how you can identify is he\she artist or not? It is very controversial, because a lot of people, who even finished Artist's Academy and etc. cannot be count as an artist, and you argument based only on this difference "is person artist or not".
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Be honest it is quite hard to find really talented artist, but things happen. Everyone among us have some talent and can show it is specific area. First of all we have to see, after that we can talk to the author and as i told eveyhting has its history and when explaining it you might understand the work. People are not the same so if something in my opinion is masterpiece or amazing for you might look as a regular stuff or opposite. Eventually it depends from the audience and at the job also.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

If person is real artist we may understand it, see it. But a person who is drawing different figures couldnt be considered as an artist, because each foolish is able to draw such pictures.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

And I have a question for you. Do you know any contemporary artists, which are very famous and takented, as, for example, Leonardo da Vinci? I guess, no. And if pictures of modern artists are their views on life, we should worry about it. Recently, I have seen a picture with some triangles, squres and circles. There are so many beautiful things around us!! why people draw such silly pictures, which nobody understands.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

I agree that art will have it's own essue in every time, it must show emotions and felling and like everything it must transform. I don't like people who just live in past, yes it was good times but we must everyithng must change. The modern art is more that real art, it is exrpessition of modern life
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Art is art because it is purely subjective, it is the 'EYE OF THE BEHOLDER.'
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Art is anything that is an expression of feeling or emotion. So anyone who looks at Modern Art and says "That's not real art" is most likely just ignorant or perhaps unenlightened to the meaning of the word "art". By the definition of "art" Modern Art is "real art", I put real art in quotes because I think it's stupid for anyone to try and create their own definition of what art is. The point is that whether you like it or not Modern Art is "real art".
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

To my mind, art isn't necessarily something perfect. Everybody has their own world perception and, consequently, own view on art. I think no one can judge other people's works because it is personal and sometimes understandable only for creator. But still I believe that self-expression is an essential part of art and even if other people are not able to understand it, it remains a kind of art. We cannot say exactly what art is because it is individual for everbyody.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

"Everybody has their own world perception and, consequently, own view on art."I agree with that. But when a simple self-proclaimed artist create something under drugs and tries to persuade society that this is a real piece of art and people believe him, moreover, they call him new Picasso and genius, it's looks very weird for me.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I understand you, but still don't you think that if his work isn't a real masterpiece he won't be a successful artist. There are critics who can tell you exactly whether it is worthy or not.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

Because you don't really know what he draw. He is really genius, I think the problem is that people don't want to know the meaning of masterpiece, they only look and say "not bad" stupid!
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

For what then artists draw pictures? For himself? To put his pictures on his wall?? NO! Always artists draw picture for people, who should appreciate it. But there is no many people who did it really, because contemporary artist's pictures silly. I think our art regress instead of progressing.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I like art in all its manifestations. And Modern art is also real art, because everything is created in a burst of inspiration can be called art because it has not other name.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Where is the boarder between inspiration and joke? Maybe so-called artist just painted some random picture for fun but everybody starts to adore him immediately and admire everything he do.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

actually sometimes something which are made in short period of time and may be done woth joke can considered as an masterpiece or one of the best creatures in art history.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

so you are agree that modern art is also one part of art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Partially i agree, but i'm still confused with this topic. The difference between art and madness is almost invisible.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Making a conclusion, i want to add that modern art is also art. IF we look deeper in this sphere we will understand it. In my point of view, everything is art, we just only do not want to believe in it.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Would my picture with sun and one tree, drawn with inspiration, considered as an art or masterpieces? I think, no.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Sometimes pieces of modern art look like childish daub or meaningless work. It's hard to compare Renaissance artists with Jackson Pollock, Dali and Andy Warhol or call their works masterpieces. So, is a Modern Art a real art, the way talented people express themselves or just worthless thing of crazy men?I see where you’re coming from, and I agree to some extent that more modern art can look pretty effortless when compared to renaissance art. I don’t consider a child without any talent, who can finger paint a real ‘artist’ per se, and I don’t consider an elephant that can slap a pre dipped paintbrush on a canvas an artist, but there is certainly a degree of aesthetics that can be subjective when determining what ‘art’ is. So I would have to say it depends on the artist, and the audience. As for the examples you provided, I am not a fan of Pollock’s work, I feel that he may fall under the ‘child without any talent, who can finger paint,’ that I just mentioned, but he certainly has some fans, and if nothing but a form of meditation, Pollock seems to be able to express himself in some way. I am not a fan of pop art either, so Warhol’s work doesn’t really appeal to me either, but I have to admit that he does possess some talent and a strong fan base. Now, Salvador Dali is one that I was surprised to see as one of your examples. Dali has a lot of talent, unlike Pollock, he is familiar with brush strokes and contrast… just an overall understanding of the technique. More so I find that he is very expressive and imaginative. Surrealism can be very captivating.Is modern art, “real art?” Yes, of course, and without a doubt. There are many contemporary artists with a lot of skill and talent. I would say that if you had to jumble all the modern art into one category, the amount of real talent far outweighs the amount of childish finger painting and elephant art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

To be honest, it was home assignment to make a debate, so I decided to pick this topic)I'm actually that Pollock's fan, as for Dali, I adore him, he's one of my favorite artists. The reason why I made such list is that usually all of them are in top of weird geniuses. Personally, I disagree with that and consider them as great masters, except for Warhol,I guess. I don't like pop art either.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I have yet to see anything worth praise from Pollock. Then again, I am not a fan of his art so I don't look for it to any significant extent. Like I mentioned though, it depends on the artist and the audience, so if you find his art intriguing, then that is great. You may see it for what it really is whereas I am blind to it. If you can, will you please send me a link to some of his work that you consider to be his best?Thanks for clarifying the examples you gave, I was a bit confused.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

I wish it wasn't considered art, but unfortunately it is.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Everything depends on people's choices and views. Somebody likes modern arts, somebody don't. I belong to second category. I can't consider the modern art as an art. I can't understand it. I understand the works of medieval artists better. Real art could change the views of watchers, sometimes save their life. Did you read tho OHenry's story Last Leaf? There is a real masterpiece.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Sometimes ART doesn't mean something beautiful, attractive or genius...ART is a feelings and emotions which were transferred to the paper.Moreover it depend on you and how you can perceive it. But I agree that not all Modern Art is..a real art..some works are absolutely meaningless and ugly. Art is something that should bring a pleasure...
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

Art is anything that expresses whether or not it is morbid, boring, colorful, or simple. Everything in the universe, not just man-assembled objects, is art. Being that, I think this argument should really boil down to, "Does Modern Art Take Talent?".My answer there would be in some places, no. In other places, yes. A person that makes his living on overpricing splats of paint on a canvas is still an artist, however little talent he may or may not possess. Even if I downright hate his art and I hate everything he does, his art still expresses and it still makes me feel emotions.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

I hope is that it won't only be a fun watch for art professionals, but it will also draw people who aren't otherwise affianced in art. As judge Simon de Pury of Phillips put it, the show will help dispel the rarified air of "hermetic in approachability" around the art world.Modern Art
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

It is art, just very poor art. Blobs of paint splashed all of a peace of paper is not something I would consider good art. A well detailed picture of a town is good art.Yet again, quality is measured differently by different people; so it is opinion.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

Modern art is real art and commands a high price, so, it has the credentials to be worthwhile art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

I think modern art does not show idea. When modern art just started to develop, artists worked on one picture for year and more, and minimalism, cubism,impressionism all this direction had core, an idea, thoughts. Artist worked hard to develop this picture from realism to modern direction. In the compare with nowadays we can see that young artist create modern art without thoughts and core. That it why, i think, the most part of modern art is not art at all.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

I partially agree with you. Anybody now can "do" art and if people do not understand them they blame us for narrow-mindedness and inability to perceive the beauty.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Yes, you are right. And also it is our mentality and poor knowledge an art field. We afraid to say sometimes, that this picture is not art and it is just rubbish. When i go to exhibition and I do not like paintings, i say that i do not like it. And, as for me, no one can blame you if you did not get idea. It is only artist's guilty, or anyone's. Maybe you are talking on different "languages" with author. Because, I think painting, it is question, or sentences, story, which artist want to ask or tell.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

Yes, i agree. The author should develop some idea to people, but if he do something randomly without purpose and expect admires, i think, it's is not art at all.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Are you sure that they are just blaming us on our narrow-mindness? what about if centureies after or even before people will concider it as an masterpiece because we cannot see the things or jusr judje. Everything can happen.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

You mentioned that in olden days artists worked on their pictures for years in order to spread some idea and meaning. But in that "strange" art still existed. Personally, I don't get the suprematism, especially Malevich's "Black Square", so I don't think that it's all about time period.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

I don't think that Malevich's "Black square" it is painting. The masterpiece must be something that will touch your eyes and mind, but "Square" it is just to take money from stupid people. Maybe in some cases you right, because a lot of modern artists draw only for a money but they sometimes draw better that Van Goch. But I prefer old art.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

The main point, that he did it first. He started to see this world from another, very different point of view, and no one did it before him. Only then artists started to discover local colors (clean colors-red, green. yellow) and composition. But the main idea, that Malevich opened that pure color can spread thought too.Before him, artist counted as a great if his pallet is large and colors different, and he can show hundreds of different tones, as seas by Ayvazovskyi.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Dinara, so in your opinion modern art should consist of some specific artists? As I understood from your arguments you are saying that person who is member of modern artist has to create a new way or show things differently? And can regular people who are not involved in anything make their works to future development of an art?
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

So, basically, every modern artist has potential to become a real master, because once great artists were not understood too? As Malevich was argued before, modern art representers faced the same problem, so maybe eventually they will become geniuses too.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

Actually I do not agree with you. Yes may be some artists worked of thier pictures for years but not all of the great artists. Some of them do in a weak and get for that masterpeice and it is not depend on time. Mostly for an artist the main thing is burst of inspiration. whenver they bave busrt of inspiration they can do things better than they were doing for years in one weak or even a day. Artist are unpredictible people also ther creations. before seeing we do not hae to judje, it might be the best job of this century or for centuries.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: Yes

Yes, this is also true. Art comes in different forms, and with different timelines. Some can be created easily, some is painstaking or more of a labor of love. Like life, I guess, different paintings can require different approaches, methods and outcomes. See the depth of meaning behind this artist, I think it's worth a look: https://www.etsy.com/shop/TwoStrokesGallery
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: yes

However, i support the idea that modern art is also art. If some work express your attitude to the world it is art. Feeling, Emotions, fears and their expression is the art. It is the basement of every art. According to this point i consider that everything is art. And we also the art of the nature
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

If all expressions of feelings and emotions would be considered as art, it would be chaos. According to you argument,I may considere myself as an artist, because I draw stupid pictures, expressing my emotions. But are my pictures considered as an art?? Of course, No
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

And also there was a lot of meanings, and the medieval art is very famous today too.
Debate: Is Modern Art a Real Art?
Side: No

I agree with Dinara, and some of the others in this line of thought. Idea definitely makes art interesting, and gives a direction or theme to a painting. Feeling is also a big part of an artist's work, and can be achieved with color, skill, presence and several other techniques. In the end, it is the viewer who decides what a painting means to him or her, so it's individual-based, I believe. But there is something to be said for having skills, for sure. I like artists who have depth to their work, and I think it makes viewing a more enjoyable experience.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

Need to know: what the child sees and hears from the first years of life, and just makes his character and views.Sometimes just the characters of animated films, not the parents, grandparents and tell the first kid on the submission of good and evil, about what is good and what is bad.Just by comparing themselves with their favorite characters a child learns to cope with their fears and difficulties, respect for others. Therefore, as we may be easily treated to a "children's movies," cartoon is - a serious means of educating the child.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Legalization violent cartoons

That's exactly why we shouldn't ban them, you can't teach a child that murder is wrong unless you teach them what murder is first
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

I think that violent cartoons damaged the fragile psyche of children because when they see violence on the TV they think that it is normal and in future they may become an maniac or crime man.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Legalization violent cartoons

I think that violent cartoons damaged the fragile psyche of children because when they see violence on the TV they think that it is normal and in future they may become an maniac or crime man.I think that violent cartoons help the young psyches of children because when they see violence on TV they think that it is terrible and in the future they may become a soldier or doctor so people don't get hurt.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

It is really important. I think violent cartoons are like "happy three friends" or Simpsons etc.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Legalization violent cartoons

The Simpsons is rated TV-14.If a parent is letting their child younger then 14 watch The Simpsons, it's the parent's fault.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Legalization violent cartoons

How is the Simpsons violent? ,
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

Nowadays ALL cartoons have violence! For instance, megamind! Where the main villain of the very severely abused
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

We should teach new generation in atmospere of kindness and honest... If we have such cartoons how can we make our children normally?
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Legalization violent cartoons

Closing off children to violence is not going to stave off violence. They need to know about violence so that they have the desire to prevent violence when they grow up.
Debate: Violent cartoons
Side: Banning violent cartoons

We should make next generation with out any violence to make this world better...