Anakin Skywalker is a more tragic character than Light Yagami.

I supposse i will have to vote for pro for a few reasons:

1) Despite pro calling Anakin "privileged" and then stating Anakin was sold off into slavery....Pro still met the criteria for a tragic character when he said Anakin was manipulated. this suggests Anakin did not entirely willingly choose to become evil.

2) Con states Light Yagami would have had a better life if he chose differently, but did not provide sufficient evidence.

The difference between the two given arguments is that Pro talks about it from the perspective of justification (i.e. were these characters justified in taking their actions and having their perspectives), whereas Con focuses solely on Light and talks about how it’s tragic that he had options taken away from him. An argument could have been made that this was a greater form of tragedy (opportunity cost), but there are 3 problems.

1) Con doesn’t discuss Anakin at all, so he provides no meaningful comparison. Discussing how Anakin’s life and contributions could have been different had he not been pressured to join the Jedi would be similar, but that comparison has to be made if you’re going to make this point. Light isn’t tragic in isolation, he has to be more tragic to win this debate.

2) Pro already made the argument that Light chose to pick up the Death Note. I need a response to that. Telling me he was bestowed with the Death Note doesn’t change the fact that he actively chose to pick it up and use it. You can argue that it, as well as the influence of Ryuk, makes it difficult to call it a choice, but I need to see that point. In the absence of it, the opportunity cost argument is weak because he would always choose some line of thought like this. The Death Note is a tool to push his aims, it does not direct his actions.

3) If you’re going to push this perspective, you have to cover what makes it tragic. There’s a definition for tragic character in the description:
“Tragic Character- The protagonist of a tragic story or drama, in which, despite their virtuous and sympathetic traits and ambitions, they ultimately meet defeat, suffering, or even an untimely end.”
So you have to engage on that level. You have to establish that Light has or had virtuous and sympathetic traits and ambitions. Pro largely focuses on motives, but that provides a bit of support on this level. Con does not. When Con’s argument is:
“Light would have spent the rest of his life pursuing something more meaningful and putting his high intellect to good use.”
That’s not enough. It suggests that Light might have been sympathetic if he hadn’t gotten the Death Note, not that he is sympathetic, even before he received the Death Note. Beyond that, it’s just a suggestion that he might have behaved differently, for which Con provides no support. There’s an argument to be made here about following in his father’s footsteps or talking about his pursuits, but I’m not going to fill in the blanks for you. There has to be a reason for me to see him as sympathetic based at least on what I can reasonably predict would happen, and Con’s not giving me a reason to predict it beyond basic assertion. That’s always going to be overwhelmed by clearly sympathetic history.

I vote Pro.