TED Conversations

Mathew Naismith

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

If it was allowed would an arena with gladiators fighting to the death prove popular in modern times?

I think it would be packed out myself which just show how bad our intellectual & moral selves have deteriorated back to sensationalism of the good old days of the Roman empire which has many similarities to the present empire we are living under today, what do you think?

Topics: sensationalism
+3
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 15 2013: I have been pondering this discussion and chatting with a couple of co-workers/friends about it. While I do believe that a portion of the population would watch and attend a gladiatorial event, I think a part that has not been discussed is the "prize" for the event.

    Yes, death in it actuality would be a deterrent for some. It would most certainly turn off a portion of the population. Not to mention that another portion of the population would be turned off while watching the event and realizing that it was in fact to the death and death is not what they expected. Still, a portion of the population would definitely watch the spectacle.

    One qualifier would be the "prize". For example, prisoners, fighting for their life and freedom, might be more interesting that two gladiators fighting for a dollar prize. I wonder what effect that might have on the individuals watching. For those who wanted to see "justice served" they might be more interested in watching if they thought "good would win" and "evil would lose", however that might be defined. The higher the stakes and prize, the more likely people would be to watch. If the spectacle was just to watch two people fight it out, then I don't see this taking off as extremely popular.

    I would contend that it would come back how well the event was advertised and supported by others.
    • thumb
      Apr 16 2013: G'day Everette

      I wouldn't attend myself of course but there are a certain portion of the populous that would.

      Below is a couple of links explaining that most of the gladiators where mischiefs slaves & criminals but 19 out of 200 gladiators died in the arenas which would include from wounds incurred in the actual arena itself.

      I have a point to make, we have electrocuted, hung, drawn & quartered shot, poisoned & so on criminals since Roman times without the criminals having a chance of redemption however in the Roman arenas they had this chance at redeeming themselves , what is more civilised, just killing people in cold blood or allowing them a chance of redemption remembering only 19 out of 200 gladiators die? I think most if not all the people on death row would participate some how especially if they could become wealthy doing so.

      Love
      Mathew
      • Apr 16 2013: I noted the links as well and the information regarding the low actual death rate. Thought I might question the data in this particular case. That being said, we discussing a different animal in this case I believe, especially when we suggest that death could be likely. Though with modern medicine, we could severely limit the death toll with medical staff on hand and such. Not would I attend or watch such an event as it does not even remotely interest me.

        I feel that the question of "redemption" also comes with a parallel discussion about justice. Is it just to allow a death row inmate a chance to walk free rather than face his crimes? That question alone would be a lively discussion. As is the discussion about the death penalty when it arises. The discussions about redemption and justice deserve discussion and merit time spent on the topic. Thought I don't know that this is quite the thread to address those issues.
        • thumb
          Apr 16 2013: G'day Everett

          Yes I suppose your right, less people would die of wounds because of medical assistance however I'm like you I wouldn't attend nor would I like such arenas to exist again even though it seems more humane than to electrocute or hang people without a chance of redemption.

          Would I give a child molester & murderer a chance of redemption? The spiritually aware side of me says yes but my human side says absolutely not, hard one to answer but the Romans answered this I suppose when it came to such a person on the end of a sward & a decision had to be made for life or death. I don't think the child molester would survive some how.

          Love
          Mathew
      • thumb
        Apr 19 2013: What an interesting POV you've presented here, Matthew. I agree with your thoughts about redemption. Hopefully, we can find better ways than the gladiator route, but I definitely think we should go in that direction. My perspective in my earlier answer was focused on the morality of the observers more than the desperation of the participants.
        • thumb
          Apr 19 2013: G'day Catya

          I think everyone no matter what should have a chance of redeeming themselves especially for the life they might have taken in my mind anyway.

          Saying that the arenas would be packed is also saying that a certain amount of the populous are immoral which would probably be correct but of course these day they are the minority not the majority.
          Love
          Mathew

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.