The Instigator
Pricetag
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points
The Contender
Luna3
Con (against)
Losing
15 Points

Agnosticism is the most logical belief in regards to the existence of a higher force.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/11/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,914 times Debate No: 1709
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (16)

 

Pricetag

Pro

In comparison to all of the other world religions I find agnosticism to be the most logical belief of them all. For many reasons I find this to be true which I will further outline at a later juncture.

First come regardless of your personal belief system.
Luna3

Con

Hello.

Primarily, agnosticism is generally categorized not as a religion, but as a non-religious "belief system." So your first point that agnosticism is the most logical religion meets a flaw in that it is not a religion.

Secondly, agnosticism means "not to know." And unlike Atheism which requires a specific conviction against the existence of God, agnosticism deals with a spectrum of beliefs from "God may exist and I just dont personally know him," to "How could any of us really know." to "Im pretty sure He doesnt exist, but who knows?"

This spectrum is so wide that to declare it as being "logical" is flawed. Perhaps you can call it common, but you can not call it logical as it can be argued that it is susceptible to the accusation that it internally contradicts itself within this spectrum.

God bless.
Debate Round No. 1
Pricetag

Pro

True it's not a religion mental slip. I stated earlier that it is the "most logical belief" in the topic.

The American heritage dictionary defines agnosticism like this:

ag�nos�ti�cism (āg-nŏs'tĭ-sĭz'əm) n.
The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist.

http://dictionary.reference.com...

I say that this is the most logical belief system because as philosopher David Hume proved you can't really know anything. Even through empirical evidence you can't see the connection or know that the connection actually exists from the cause to the effect. You may think that you are certain of something, but you can't know it. Therefore I see that you can't either know or not know anything, especially in reference to God or a higher power. Therefore by using epistemology we can see that agnosticism is the most logical.
Luna3

Con

Logic, however, does not require absolute proof, just reasonable proof. And just as a man that leaves the room for a cigarette when his wife is in labor returns to find a baby in the arms of his wife must assume that the baby was born, having not witnessed the birth, we too can look at the creation that is earth and assume that it likely had a creator.

For if it didnt, the universe would be the only thing we could think of that was a creation absent of a creator.

When pressed that man would have to concede "no, I dont have proof that that is my child," yet all available evidence says that it is.

Similarly, with the world. From a logical standpoint: how could something with such an intricate design (everything from a cell to a tiger to a lake) not have a designer precede it? It defies logic to say that a design has no designer. It even further defies logic to say that this life has no recognizable design or that it is "random."
Debate Round No. 2
Pricetag

Pro

It does not, however knowing does. In any case every thought should be accompanied with a strong dose of doubt. In that way agnosticism is the most logical.

The two situations are not completely analogous though. You could use DNA to prove that that child is in fact that man's baby and not another one that the nurse brought in but we have no real certainty of how the universe came to be or a similar test to prove the existence of a higher power beyond a reasonable doubt. It's possible that the universe was always here, the theory of conservation and mass validates this idea.

You spoke of order and intricacy; however, you must not lose sight of the fact that the universe in many other places is chaotic. With the infinite number of variables in the universe you are going to see some order and some chaos, it's a matter of probability. If you look at it that way it's not too odd to think of the universe without a creator. However, that doesn't mean that we can know that there isn't. My point is simply that both sides have sufficient data to where the most logical solution is to say that we can't know. Both sides have good arguments; therefore, we can't prove or disprove the existence of a higher power and
Luna3

Con

You use, incorrectly, the term "beyond a reasonable doubt."

In order for something to be logical, it need not be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt," it simply need be logical.

It is logical to say that your wife loves you even though no DNA sample or scientific evidence can prove it. It is logical to say "Harry had a dream last night" after Harry told you he had a dream.

Could either party be lying: yes. Logic does not require fool proof TRUTH.

Similarly, because the universe has a specific, intricate, beautiful design, it is logical to conclude that the universe has been designed and further has some kind of designer.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by gonovice 9 years ago
gonovice
nice use of "god bless" to an agnostic person in your opinion statement, Luna3.
Posted by dalzuga 9 years ago
dalzuga
Oh right. Sorry lol. You said "other" I overlooked that. woops. yea you're right lol
Posted by dalzuga 9 years ago
dalzuga
*proven

This sentence is now 25 characters in length.
Posted by dalzuga 9 years ago
dalzuga
Comparing an apple with a banana doesn't make the apple a banana. Comparing agnosticism with a religion doesn't make agnosticism a religion.

"In comparison to all of the other world religions I find agnosticism to be the most logical belief of them all."

"In comparison with all bananas I find apples to be much better."

I've proved my point.
Posted by Luna3 9 years ago
Luna3
DALZUGA:

He wrote:

In comparison to all of the other world religions I find agnosticism...

This, to me, is an implication that he is calling agnosticism a world religion, using the word "other"
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Tomorrow then. Looking forward to it.

Good luck on finals.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
I'd agree as far as the biblical God. However, I'm studying for finals right now (or supposed to be), so you can either challenge me and I'll respond tom. or I'll do the same to you tom.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
I'm atheist, pricetag, maybe we can debate this topic. I think it is most logical to believe in the non-existence of a god. Most certainly the biblical god.
Posted by dalzuga 9 years ago
dalzuga
"Primarily, agnosticism is generally categorized not as a religion, but as a non-religious "belief system." So your first point that agnosticism is the most logical religion meets a flaw in that it is not a religion."

Pricetag never said it was a religion. Read again.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
correction to that last post:

*is in*

not "in in"
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by captgeech 9 years ago
captgeech
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Luna3 9 years ago
Luna3
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by obama0808 9 years ago
obama0808
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by obama0807 9 years ago
obama0807
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by persuasive 9 years ago
persuasive
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Obama0809 9 years ago
Obama0809
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by artC 9 years ago
artC
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by TJBric 9 years ago
TJBric
PricetagLuna3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03