The Instigator
Pricetag
Pro (for)
Winning
48 Points
The Contender
artC
Con (against)
Losing
43 Points

Agnosticism is the most logical belief in regards to the idea of a higher power.

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: 1/16/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,489 times Debate No: 1841
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (42)
Votes (29)

 

Pricetag

Pro

My reasoning behind the aforementioned statement is simply this. We don't know and we can't know much of anything especially in terms of the existence of God. Don't get me wrong I highly doubt that he exists; however in regards to metaphysics it's hard to explain the world and universe as is if you're a theist or an atheist. Here is my logic:

1. There is suffering and there is suffering abundantly on earth, this truism casts huge doubt on the idea of an all-powerful, loving, caring God.

2. There is much order and complexity in this part of the universe, this gives some support for the necessity of a higher power. However there is much "chaos" in other sectors of the universe, this makes me believe that our design and complexity is only a probability.

3. There is the theory of conservation of mass and energy which suggests that it's possible that things were always here. However with the amount of order amongst physical laws and theory there is some evidence for a higher power.

Even though there is the theory of conservation of mass and energy I'm still not convinced that the universe has always been here. Both sides have some good points but I don't think that either can definitively say that there side is the right one. That is why I, personally, am an agnostic and think of it as the most logical choice of all belief systems.
artC

Con

All of your points are true. I agree with them so I will not debate the points from the previous argument but instead the topic.

Istead of being the most logical, I believe agnosticism is the most passive choice when deciding a belief in the existence of a higher power. We can not prove anything for certain. There is however more evidence of the non-existence than the existence of a higher power. It must be considered that the logic for the existence is based loosely on the holes that exist in the argument against the existence. Sciene can not prove everything YET.

In my opinion and the opinion of many atheists, there is enough evidence to fairly dispute the existence of a higher power. For exaple, why is it an argument for the side of theists that there is a natural order in the world. Why can't this be a product of a universe with no purpose or preference?

Well, it's time for class. Don;t want t be late. Looking forward to your reply.
Debate Round No. 1
Pricetag

Pro

You have some very good points here I'll admit to that.

However, I'll make an analogy and treat this like the justice system treats a crime. Both sides have good points and I agree that in the case of Atheism v. Theism there is more evidence towards the former. That being said I don't think either side has surpassed the barrier of "reasonable doubt" to prove themselves correct. Therefore, I think it's most logical to take the sidelines until we can have some level of certainty in this epic debate. I truly don't think that atheists have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that their side is correct, unless you can provide something I haven't mentioned before.
artC

Con

No, I suppose there isn't any evidence I could present that you haven't already considered. However, seeing as there is nothing to gain or lose except a title in this, it does not have to be treated like a criminal by the justice system. I am a self declared atheist and humanist. This is not set in stone, if tomorrow I decide to suddenly belive in god, I could. Atheism is based on logic and if logic states something contradictory to present belief, it can esily be modified accordingly.

For me, saying I'm atheist is a strong declaration to the world that I don't believe in god. You seem to not believe in god. It is just a clearer title. The title agnostic gives many mixed messages. Is there a time of day or a day in the week when you beive in god? I doubt it. Commit!

I'm just kidding. You don't have to, obviously. I respect your attempt at objectivity.

I guess what I'm trying to say that if there is uch more evidence against the existence of a higher power than not. And the only evidence presented for the existence is half-baked evidence, than why be on the fence about it? I have been convinced there is no god. Deciding on one side does not end the argument.

I know I was all over the place here. I hope I made some sense.
Debate Round No. 2
Pricetag

Pro

Since this is the last round I wanted to remind the voters to not vote for my opponent solely on her incredible beauty but on who won the debate. I know that it's hard to ignore it, but be professional people! Also, artC what are you studying at Arizona State?

Now onto the debate. You did make sense and had some very good points.

You mentioned that your belief is not set in stone and I commend you for keeping an open mind. However, as I am a prideful person I think it's nice to enjoy the benefits of in no way being wrong in this debate of atheism vs. theism. As I declare myself an agnostic I will never have to admit that I'm wrong, I'm just simply waiting. In being an atheist you don't have the same luxury. Again I just think that until we have some level of certainty on the issue we should wait.

There still is a possibility that there is a higher power. Possibly somewhere along the lines of deism. I will agree that the biblical god is an idiotic idea; however, there are other theories of a higher power that are plausible. I don't see the need to proclaim that there is no god if I'm not certain, just as I see no need to proclaim that there is one when again I have no level of certainty that there is.

We will have to discuss this further at a later time.
artC

Con

Oh no, don't say that, I don't know if you noticed but I have a somewhat ongoing argument with another member of this site about my picture. Don't give him anything quoteable. I am studying political science and philosophy at ASU. It sounds like two really worthless degrees but I plan on going to law school. What do you study?

Good point. But then you would have to add a "for me" at the end of the debate topic.

I guess the difference is that I am pretty certain there is no higher power, furthermore, I find it a hinderance to believe there is. It is a distinct difference in the way I live my life.

We will definitely have to take this further at some point. It is an interesting topic. As is the one on absolute morality.
Debate Round No. 3
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Agent, what are you talking about? Honestly, I'd like to know.
Posted by JackBauerPower 9 years ago
JackBauerPower
That doesn't make sense..............
Posted by Agent_D 9 years ago
Agent_D
artc is a kind of "cut-copy-paste" debater. and pretend that she works on that thesis.
Posted by JackBauerPower 9 years ago
JackBauerPower
Fair enough

25 characters in length...that is all
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
If you will reread what I said you will clearly see that I said the unanswered questions could possibly lead to the existence of a higher force. However, I said we don't know, this is why I am an agnostic and not a deist because we don't know.
Posted by JackBauerPower 9 years ago
JackBauerPower
Yes however he implied believing in a creator who did just that.
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Deists believe in a first cause god, that's far from the concept of agnosticism which basically says we don't know or we can't know.
Posted by JackBauerPower 9 years ago
JackBauerPower
No pricetag, you would be considered a deist.
Posted by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
Ah, but Voltaire would say that a man who answers every question he is asked is a fool. And Socrates would encourage you to answer a question with a question. My point is that there is too many questions and I don't have the answers; therefore, I am an agnostic as I believe it is the logical thing to be.
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
If God does exist? Where did all the matter come from... and... where did God come from?

You've added a question. Real answers don't do that.
29 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by artC 8 years ago
artC
PricetagartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by InquireTruth 8 years ago
InquireTruth
PricetagartCTied
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 sippinsizzurp 8 years ago
sippinsizzurp
PricetagartCTied
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 Vi_Veri 8 years ago
Vi_Veri
PricetagartCTied
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 blond_guy 8 years ago
blond_guy
PricetagartCTied
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 Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
PricetagartCTied
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 Agent_D 9 years ago
Agent_D
PricetagartCTied
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 captgeech 9 years ago
captgeech
PricetagartCTied
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 Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
PricetagartCTied
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 vicstorm15 9 years ago
vicstorm15
PricetagartCTied
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