There is a huge difference. Twilight is just a teenage love story, I couldn't even get through the first book and found it be complete crap. The creativity and details it took to create the world of Harry Potter is just amazing. You can even tell by the fans. Harry Potter fans are a bunch of nerds, Twilight fans are a bunch of love crazy teenage girls or adults who never grew out of that phase.
Harry Potter fans are a bunch of nerds, Twilight fans are a bunch of love crazy teenage girls
I'd argue that neither is superior to the other, btw - but since we're on Hacker News of all places, it's quite understandable that there'd be a lot of Harry-Potter-loving nerds here! The comment above would be (rightly) heavily upvoted if it had been posted on a Twilight forum...
Do you really think you're inherently superior to the average teenage girl? Really?
On what metric? Ah, intelligence? Productivity? Technology skills? Contribution to humanity's scientific progress? And who decided that those are the way to measure the superiority of one human being over another?
You say "moral relativism", but I don't think you've looked up the definition of that term. Moral relativism is about the evaluation of moral judgements and actions, not of people's intrinsic worth.
Fundamentally, you're only "better" than a crazy teenage girl according to metrics that you've made up. For example, if the ability to give birth to and nurture children is picked, you (assuming you're male) would be intrinsically "worse".
You got it exactly backwards, I meant they were better. That you assumed otherwise tells us more about the relative esteem in which you hold the two than it does about anything I could say.
Ah, sorry, I, er, misunderestimated you then. I don't think it tells about the esteem I hold for those two groups - more about the assumptions I make about HN users.
