[Discussion] Mihawk is>Shanks right?

[LBeezy]

They're friends

They're rivals.

Just wanted to share something with both of you guys and maybe the two of you can come to a partial agreement..

I think that Shanks and Mihawk are both friends and rivals.

Nothing about the definition of "Rivals" defines whether the relationship needs to be positive or negative.

You can be rivals with your best friend. (Naruto and Sasuke) (Goku and Vegeta maybe)

You can also be rivals with someone who isn't your friend.


So with that being said, you guys were both right about that part in particular.. Shanks and Mihawk are both rivals and friends imo..

 

[Love Cook]

lol get a load of this bogard guy with his non-canon databook and revenge repping me because I said something about it. Says something about the people on this site and their passion for their 'fav'.

People are blind for the facts when they feel their fandom collapsing. It's just time to accept that Mihawk > Shanks is never proven. And most likely is the other way around. That is the only thing I'm saying and it's enough for others to launch personal attacks and more in order to prove me wrong but without any prove.

sad sad people.

 

[KingHashirama]

Just wanted to share something with both of you guys and maybe the two of you can come to a partial agreement..

I think that Shanks and Mihawk are both friends and rivals.

Nothing about the definition of "Rivals" defines whether the relationship needs to be positive or negative.

You can be rivals with your best friend. (Naruto and Sasuke) (Goku and Vegeta maybe)

You can also be rivals with someone who isn't your friend.


So with that being said, you guys were both right about that part in particular.. Shanks and Mihawk are both rivals and friends imo..

Issue is Naruto will never say to Sasuke "I'm not in the mood, have you come to fight?". Their relationship is comparable to Whitebeard and Roger. Enemies, that have respect for each other.

 

[TheTrueSoloGod]

Nop/Thread.

 

[A v i]

lol get a load of this bogard guy with his non-canon databook and revenge repping me because I said something about it. Says something about the people on this site and their passion for their 'fav'.

People are blind for the facts when they feel their fandom collapsing. It's just time to accept that Mihawk > Shanks is never proven. And most likely is the other way around. That is the only thing I'm saying and it's enough for others to launch personal attacks and more in order to prove me wrong but without any prove.

sad sad people.

Fanbooks are approved by Oda, he even suggested fans to refer them to know more details regarding devils fruits in Vol 47 SBS. So if they get approved by the author then they're indeed legit. At the very least, they're far more legit than an opinion of a biased reader.

 

[Phoenix110]

Titlewise I'd say Shanks is greater but Mihawk's title as strongest swordsman is not something that necessarily makes him higher than Shanks and in a full blow battle am sure Shanks would win extremely high diff

 

[YellowFang]

This argument needs to be stopped for Oda to clarify it...

As someone mentioned earlier, Mihawk provided with a strong crew just like other Yonko will easily be qualified as a Yonko. Even this newly introduced character; Weeble, has the potential to be a Yonko provided a suitable crew...

This Yonko argument is totally flawed, there are individuals who are around Admiral level strength but don't enjoy reputations like that of same or higher tier individuals who exert their heavy influence through their strong crews...

 

[LBeezy]

The same way people like to dissect the title "Yonko" and break it down to those four pirates needing their crews, and discrediting their personal power..

These same people should dissect the title "World's Strongest Swordsman" as well, and realize that Mihawk is only the best in swordsmanship, EXCLUSIVELY. Meaning that Shanks can easily lose to him in a duel of pure swordsmanship, but can very well win in a fight to the death, utilizing his haki, fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, gun perhaps, and/or any other means of attack Shanks has in his arsenal.

It's as simple as that.


/Thread for real.

 

[Punk Hazard]

The same way people like to dissect the title "Yonko" and break it down to those four pirates needing their crews, and discrediting their personal power..

These same people should dissect the title "World's Strongest Swordsman" as well, and realize that Mihawk is only the best in swordsmanship, EXCLUSIVELY. Meaning that Shanks can easily lose to him in a duel of pure swordsmanship, but can very well win in a fight to the death, utilizing his haki, fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, gun perhaps, and/or any other means of attack Shanks has in his arsenal.

It's as simple as that.


/Thread for real.

Agreed. Also, Whitebeard is best as manliness and Kaido is best at living thingness.

 

[LBeezy]

Agreed. Also, Whitebeard is best as manliness and Kaido is best at living thingness.

Correct.

Funny how ToshiZO and I already proved how false that form of logic is..

 

[Punk Hazard]

Correct.

Funny how ToshiZO and I already proved how false that form of logic is..

No you didn't.

You interpret World's Strongest Swordsman as someone who is the best at wielding the qualities of being a swordsman.
The same logic can be used to interpret World's Strongest Man as someone who is the best at wielding the qualities of being a man.

 

[LBeezy]

No you didn't.

You interpret World's Strongest Swordsman as someone who is the best at wielding the qualities of being a swordsman.
The same logic can be used to interpret World's Strongest Man as someone who is the best at wielding the qualities of being a man.

You and I literally had this same debate earlier on in the thread. And since you didn't reply to my last post on the matter, on page 3, I'll post it again..

I definitely see your way of thinking bro. But my point is that it's not necessarily logical..

Because it's all about the title.. the titles do not have to mean the same thing. Titles can be and are different from each other for different people and circumstances.

Mihawk's title is the only one that involves a weapon/object/variable that can be subtracted (fairly, without killing him, letting him live), and then therefore he wouldn't hold the title anymore.

But you can't subtract anything from WB's or Kaido's title beside them themselves. (Which would be their own existence, causing their death.)

The best singer title for Michael Jackson, can be earned as a human being.

The best runner title can be earned as a human being.

But the best basketball player requires being a human being AND having that basketball to be earned. Leave the human being. Take away the basketball. No more title.

There's a big difference there. It's black and white.

That's why what Macho said didn't make sense.. the latter was actually the most probable choice/option.

I'm not sure how you guys don't see it..

 

[Punk Hazard]

You and I literally had this same debate earlier on in the thread. And since you didn't reply to my last post on the matter, on page 3, I'll post it again..

Oh no I read it and I see what you're saying. That's just your interpretation that I don't see as correct and your explanation did absolutely nothing to sway my opinion on the matter because I don't see the same amount of significance you're seeing one title involving an object and the other titles not involving objects, especially when I pointed out things in each title that could be considered equivocal "objects," i.e., voice for Jackson, ball for Jordan, and legs for Bolt. After all, you're arguing that taking the ball from Jordan prevents him from playing basketball, but you fail to equate the fact that taking Michael's voice and Bolt's legs do the same thing for them in respect to singing and running. Applying that to WB and Mihawk would be taking Mihawk's sword away, and taking away WB's Gura Gura and physical might, as WB wouldn't be World's Strongest Man anymore if you take away his Devil Fruit and his physical might, same way Mihawk wouldn't be WSS if you took away his sword.

 

[A v i]

Mihawk is EOS goal for Zoro who'll eventually be Rayleigh of current era. Prime Rayleigh should easily be on par with the people who call themselves yonko. That said, I don't understand why the point of Mihawk being on par with Yonko sounds quixotic for some. To boot it further, Oda in a recent SBS answer placed Mihawk of all people in the same breath as Whitebeard and Shanks while referring to them as legends among strong men. That should give a clear idea about how highly Oda thinks of Mihawk.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Mihawk is EOS goal for Zoro who'll eventually be Rayleigh of current era. Prime Rayleigh should easily be on par with the people who call themselves yonko. That said, I don't understand why the point of Mihawk being on par with Yonko sounds quixotic for some. To boot it further, Oda in a recent SBS answer placed Mihawk of all people in the same breath as Whitebeard and Shanks while referring to them as legends among strong men. That should give a clear idea about how highly Oda thinks of Mihawk.

Yeah but take away his sword and then what? #QuestionOfTheWeek

 

[LBeezy]

Oh no I read it and I see what you're saying. That's just your interpretation that I don't see as correct and your explanation did absolutely nothing to sway my opinion on the matter because I don't see the same amount of significance you're seeing one title involving an object and the other titles not involving objects, especially when I pointed out things in each title that could be considered equivocal "objects," i.e., voice for Jackson, ball for Jordan, and legs for Bolt. After all, you're arguing that taking the ball from Jordan prevents him from playing basketball, but you fail to equate the fact that taking Michael's voice and Bolt's legs do the same thing for them in respect to singing and running. Applying that to WB and Mihawk would be taking Mihawk's sword away, and taking away WB's Gura Gura and physical might, as WB wouldn't be World's Strongest Man anymore if you take away his Devil Fruit and his physical might, same way Mihawk wouldn't be WSS if you took away his sword.

My interpretation just so happens to be factual though. While yours is purely opinion based..

It seems that you're letting your passion for debate, cloud your ability to think logically.

Let me list off straight facts from here on out and see how you reply.. reminder: these are only facts, in case you decide to deny.. #Facts

Okay...

If one title involves a living object and a non living object. And two titles only involve one living object each. There's a difference there.

Simple right?

Okay, next.. when you say you pointed out things that could be considered equivocal, my response was that although for your argument you consider them equal, they are actually not in reality. A basketball is a foreign object that Michael Jordan is not born with. Plus the basketball itself is in the actual title "World's Best Basketball Player". That title can only be held by the human who has the skills AND the basketball to prove said skills. What can Jordan do without a basketball to prove his title?

A voice, is NOT an object at all.. and it is literally apart of Michael Jackson, inside of him.. he is born with it. Hence, No matter what, no matter where, any time any place M.J. can prove his title "World's Best Singer".

Legs, are technically not independent individual objects. They are apart of a living object. They are literally apart of Usain Bolt. His own flesh/bones/muscle/blood cells/DNA. He was born with them. Hence, No matter what, no matter where, any time any place Bolt can prove his title "World's fastest runner"

Back to One Piece..
"World's Strongest Swordsman"
"World's Strongest Man"
"World's Strongest living creature" (or is it beast?)

I'm simply saying that two of those titles define the living component of the title. And that's it. The title only describes the man or creature as a whole. Who they are entirely. What they can do themselves whenever and wherever. They can prove their title no matter what, no matter where, any time any place.

But one title defines the living component of the title, AND a non living object. So therefore, if you were to subtract the non living object (The Sword) away, what happens? How does Mihawk prove his title anywhere and anytime? Without a sword? What is he without a sword? Is he now the strongest man????

Bottom line is.. there can be and are different types of titles. In this case they're are two of one kind. And one of one kind. It's not rocket science to see that one title includes an extra component. Other than the title holder himself.

That's the end of my straight facts segment.


This last part is purely opinion based.. I just want to say that I do see where you're coming from, because you're right about what would happen if you took away WB's Gura Gura and physical might, he obviously wouldn't be the WSM anymore.. but his title alone is not "The World's Strongest Gura Gura no Mi user".
His title is however "The World's Strongest Man" and back to the main point that you and Uzumaki Macho said, no it does not mean he is the best at being a man. It simply means he is the strongest man. It's black and white. "The world's strongest swordsman" title means that Mihawk is the best at swordsmanship. It's black and white.

 

[Punk Hazard]

My interpretation just so happens to be factual though. While yours is purely opinion based..

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAHHAHA

It seems that you're letting your passion for debate, cloud your ability to think logically.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA

Let me list off straight facts from here on out and see how you reply.. reminder: these are only facts, in case you decide to deny.. #Facts

Stop, you're killing me.

Okay...

If one title involves a living object and a non living object. And two titles only involve one living object each. There's a difference there.

Simple right?

This detail is irrelevant in my opinion, but is relevant in yours.

Okay, next.. when you say you pointed out things that could be considered equivocal, my response was that although for your argument you consider them equal, they are actually not in reality.

Your opinion as well.

A basketball is a foreign object that Michael Jordan is not born with. Plus the basketball itself is in the actual title "World's Best Basketball Player". That title can only be held by the human who has the skills AND the basketball to prove said skills. What can Jordan do without a basketball to prove his title?

What can Michael Jackson do without his voice to prove that he is the best singer in the world?

A voice, is NOT an object at all.. and it is literally apart of Michael Jackson, inside of him.. he is born with it. Hence, No matter what, no matter where, any time any place M.J. can prove his title "World's Best Singer".

But it is still a thing he requires in order to prove his title. It not being an external object is irrelevant because removing it from Michael accomplishes the same as removing a basketball from Jordan: It is impossible for them to prove their title. That's what makes them equivalent(turns out I used equivocal wrong in that context, though the word applies in another). Never said they were EQUAL, but they are EQUIVALENT. Removing them accomplishes the same effect. That is a fact.

Legs, are technically not independent individual objects. They are apart of a living object. They are literally apart of Usain Bolt. His own flesh/bones/muscle/blood cells/DNA. He was born with them. Hence, No matter what, no matter where, any time any place Bolt can prove his title "World's fastest runner"

Above retort applies to this as well. It being an external object or a biological object or an abstract object does not matter when removing them accomplishes the same effect.

Back to One Piece..
"World's Strongest Swordsman"
"World's Strongest Man"
"World's Strongest living creature" (or is it beast?)

Strongest Living Thing/Creature

I'm simply saying that two of those titles define the living component of the title. And that's it. The title only describes the man or creature as a whole. Who they are entirely. What they can do themselves whenever and wherever. They can prove their title no matter what, no matter where, any time any place.

Which, again, is irrelevant.

But one title defines the living component of the title, AND a non living object. So therefore, if you were to subtract the non living object (The Sword) away, what happens? How does Mihawk prove his title anywhere and anytime? Without a sword? What is he without a sword? Is he now the strongest man????

What is Whitebeard without his Devil Fruit? Also, is a Devil Fruit not also an external object? Was Whitebeard born with the powers of the Gura Gura no Mi? Whitebeard's Devil Fruit is also the result of an external object.

Bottom line is.. there can be and are different types of titles. In this case they're are two of one kind. And one of one kind. It's not rocket science to see that one title includes an extra component. Other than the title holder himself.

Here's the context where it's right: That's equivocal. In your opinion, all three aren't the same. In my opinion, they are. That's how you interpret it for yourself, this is how I interpret it for myself.

It is a fact that Mihawk's title is tied to an external object while Whitebeard's is tied to an external object that became internal and Kaido's is also most likely internal. It is your opinion, not a fact, that this makes their titles different enough fundamentally that they aren't the same type.

That's the end of my straight facts segment.

With tons of opinion thrown in.

if you took away WB's Gura Gura and physical might, he obviously wouldn't be the WSM anymore

This is the only part of that section that really matters. It's what determines his worth to hold the title, and when removed, he's no longer worthy.

His title is however "The World's Strongest Man" and back to the main point that you and Uzumaki Macho said, no it does not mean he is the best at being a man. It simply means he is the strongest man.

And WSS means Mihawk is the strongest swordsman, which Shanks falls under.

 

[LBeezy]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAHHAHA

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA

Lol now you're making me laugh..

Stop, you're killing me.

xd I'm sorryyyy dude.

This detail is irrelevant in my opinion, but is relevant in yours.

hmm.. then I guess that would make it both irrelevant and relevant at the same time. In the same universe.. woah..

Your opinion as well.

Not my opinion. Reality. - a basketball is not the same thing as a voice or a pair of legs. Sorry bro..

What can Michael Jackson do without his voice to prove that he is the best singer in the world?

absolutely nothing. Thanks for proving my point further.

But it is still a thing he requires in order to prove his title. It not being an external object is irrelevant because removing it from Michael accomplishes the same as removing a basketball from Jordan: It is impossible for them to prove their title. That's what makes them equivalent(turns out I used equivocal wrong in that context, though the word applies in another). Never said they were EQUAL, but they are EQUIVALENT. Removing them accomplishes the same effect. That is a fact.

It being an external object is not irrelevant at all though.. you can remove Jordans basketball without doing anything to Jordan. How can you remove M.J.'s voice? How can you physically grab M.J.'s voice and just take it away like you can do with the basketball?

Oh and yes IF you removed both that would accomplish the same effect, that was a fact. Good job. Your first one in a while.

Above retort applies to this as well. It being an external object or a biological object or an abstract object does not matter when removing them accomplishes the same effect.

Yes.. actually it does matter. Take away a basketball from someone at your local basketball court. Then go take away someone's voice. Oh and don't forget to take away someone's legs after.. lol come on bro, are you serious? XD

Which, again, is irrelevant.

Nope. Actually was extremely relevant.. and continues to prove that I'm right.

What is Whitebeard without his Devil Fruit? Also, is a Devil Fruit not also an external object? Was Whitebeard born with the powers of the Gura Gura no Mi? Whitebeard's Devil Fruit is also the result of an external object.

I knew you would say this.. only problem is we don't have Devil Fruits in our world.. so in the world of One Piece, all you have to do is eat that DF once and now it is apart of you. Now it is how your body exists. That's all there is to it. GG tho buddy..

Here's the context where it's right: That's equivocal. In your opinion, all three aren't the same. In my opinion, they are. That's how you interpret it for yourself, this is how I interpret it for myself.

It is a fact that Mihawk's title is tied to an external object while Whitebeard's is tied to an external object that became internal and Kaido's is also most likely internal. It is your opinion, not a fact, that this makes their titles different enough fundamentally that they aren't the same type.

It is actually a fact and not my opinion that they are different. If they weren't different then all three would be the strongest swordsman simultaneously.

It is however your opinion that you disagree with the facts.

And if that is how you want to end this, that's fine with me. (Agreeing to disagree) Because I can't keep posting facts just for you to be ignorant and remain in denial.

With tons of opinion thrown in.

Nope. Just facts.

This is the only part of that section that really matters. It's what determines his worth to hold the title, and when removed, he's no longer worthy.


And WSS means Mihawk is the strongest swordsman, which Shanks falls under.

WSS means strongest solely with a sword. In a fight to the death however, Shanks can utilize his haki, fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, gun perhaps, and/or any other means of attack that he has in his arsenal, and pull the win.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Not my opinion. Reality. - a basketball is not the same thing as a voice or a pair of legs. Sorry bro..

Correct, the same way a basketball isn't the same as a sword. They are equivalent because it's an analogy.

absolutely nothing. Thanks for proving my point further.

You mean the same way Jordan can do absolutely nothing to prove his title without his ball?

It being an external object is not irrelevant at all though..

Says you.

you can remove Jordans basketball without doing anything to Jordan. How can you remove M.J.'s voice? How can you physically grab M.J.'s voice and just take it away like you can do with the basketball?

Stab him in the throat. Rip out of his tongue. Burn his windpipe with acid. Blow off his lower jaw. Break his jaw. Slash his throat. Kick him really, really hard in the neck. Expose him to a really nasty strain of influenza.

Oh and yes IF you removed both that would accomplish the same effect, that was a fact. Good job. Your first one in a while.

Therefore they are analogous, proving my point.

Yes.. actually it does matter. Take away a basketball from someone at your local basketball court. Then go take away someone's voice. Oh and don't forget to take away someone's legs after.. lol come on bro, are you serious? XD

You're comparing Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan, and Usain Bolt to Mihawk, Whitebeard, and Kaido. And you're asking me if my analogies are serious. YOU started the ridiculous analogy war from the very jump.

I knew you would say this.. only problem is we don't have Devil Fruits in our world.. so in the world of One Piece, all you have to do is eat that DF once and now it is apart of you. Now it is how your body exists. That's all there is to it. GG tho buddy..

So you can't compare DF abilities to things in the real-world because DF are fictional, but you can compare fictional characters to real world people. Logical.

It is actually a fact and not my opinion that they are different. If they weren't different then all three would be the strongest swordsman simultaneously.

Nope. It is a fact that what defines them is different. It is your opinion that means they can't be in the same category or be compared.

The bolded makes absolutely no sense btw. They aren't the same title, no one ever said this ever; they are three separate titles that are capable of being compared.

It is however your opinion that you disagree with the facts.

Just read this back to yourself out loud a few times.

And if that is how you want to end this, that's fine with me. (Agreeing to disagree) Because I can't keep posting facts just for you to be ignorant and remain in denial.




Nope. Just facts.

You have an inflated sense of the importance of your own words. Every one of your conclusions are opinions that were based on facts, but still opinions because the facts you're using can be used to draw different interpretations.

WSS means strongest solely with a sword. In a fight to the death however, Shanks can utilize his haki, fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, gun perhaps, and/or any other means of attack that he has in his arsenal, and pull the win.

Nope, World's Strongest Swordsman means that of all people who are swordsmen, Mihawk is the strongest. Kaku utilized martial arts and a DF, and he was still classified as a swordsman. Zoro defeated him because he is the stronger swordsman. So the same way Zoro, the stronger swordsman, beat Kaku( using his fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, and/or any other means of attack that he has in his arsenal) with just his swordsmanship, Mihawk, the stronger swordsman, can beat Shanks(using his his fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, and/or any other means of attack that he has in his arsenal).

 

[KingHashirama]

The same way people like to dissect the title "Yonko" and break it down to those four pirates needing their crews, and discrediting their personal power..

These same people should dissect the title "World's Strongest Swordsman" as well, and realize that Mihawk is only the best in swordsmanship, EXCLUSIVELY. Meaning that Shanks can easily lose to him in a duel of pure swordsmanship, but can very well win in a fight to the death, utilizing his haki, fists, legs, feet, head, elbows, gun perhaps, and/or any other means of attack Shanks has in his arsenal.

It's as simple as that.


/Thread for real.

Its not those 4 pirates "needing their crews and discrediting their personal power".. its those 4 pirates already having strong as well fleets and many territories , their personal power being the thing to make it all happen. TERRITORIES/FLEETS are what makes a Yonko. Not being the 4 strongest pirates in 1 vs 1. WSS is strictly about ones ability in 1 vs 1 fights as a swordsman.

Shanks - Swordsman /Haki
Mihawk- Swordsman / Haki

And it has nothing to do with one "Easily" losing to Mihawk in a fight, but simply losing to him. Both have the same fighting styles shown so far.. unless Shanks is revealed to be a brawler like luffy.. then thats a different story. BUT from what has been shown, he is a Swordsman/Haki user like Mihawk.. and they have dueled before.. and Mihawk is the one who i hailed as the WSS.. meaning Mihawk bested shanks.