The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
squonk
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Are Atheists Able to Know Reality from Delusion?

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
squonk
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,084 times Debate No: 85929
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (70)
Votes (1)

 

ViceRegent

Con

It is a painfully simple Q: How does any atheist rationally know reality from delusion? If an atheist cannot provide an answer to this most basic of all intellectual questions, then nothing else they say matters, for they will be unable to tell us if they believe it because it is true or because they are deluded.

If you answer is that atheists have no rational way to know reality from delusion, you are right, but this debate is not for you.

You bear the BOP to show that atheism does not fail as a worldview right out of the gate. If you change the subject, you will automatically lose the debate.
squonk

Pro

I want to make sure I properly understand what you're talking about here. Are you asking how an atheist knows that his or her perception reflects reality? For instance, "How do you know that what you perceive as 'purple' is in fact purple?" Is that the quesiton you're getting at here, or have I misunderstood you?
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

Yes, how do you know that what you think is real, regardless of why you think it is real, is actually real and not a product of a delusional mind?
squonk

Pro

If we're talking about physical objects: I know that the thing I am perceiving is real because everyone else perceives it, too. If I see the chair, and you see the chair, and everyone sees the chair, I know that the chair is not my delusion . . . unless, of course, everyone is delusional in the exact same way. Maybe everyone is hallucinating the exact same chair! How can we be sure that the chair is absolutely real?

Whether or not you have faith in God, you cannot be certain that what humans perceive is "absolute reality." Maybe what we consider "purple" is actually green. Maybe the past never existed. Maybe we're all brains inside jars, and our entire existence is an illusion. "But I have faith that God designed our senses & brains to correctly interpret absolute reality!" Good for you. In spite of your faith to the contrary, you still might be a brain in a jar.


Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

You make the same irrational argument as everyone else. You claim to know reality from delusion by your senses, which you know are true because of others' senses, which you know because of your senses. In other words, you use your senses to confirm your senses, a viciously circular and irrational argument, which is non-responsive to the OP, which asked for a rational answer. Try again.
squonk

Pro

I already answered your question, but I'll clarify it for you. I am not "using my senses to confirm my senses." I am saying that we cannot confirm our senses. It makes no difference whether or not you believe in God: you cannot be certain that what you perceive as "purple" is absolutely purple. Maybe it's green. We don't know for sure.
Debate Round No. 3
70 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Bolas// Mod action: NOT Removed<

4 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Spelling/Grammar and sources are all tied. Spelling and Grammar could have been better on both sides of the debate. No sources were given on either side of the debate. Con never really made any arguments, and just put the BOP on the other person. When the other person attempted to explain, Con just denied it and said, "Try again." Points to Pro for actually making an argument. Conduct goes to Pro also for this reason. Pro made a valid point that Con refused to accept. He simply responded that Pro was using the exact same argument as everyone else. Instead of saying why that isn't a good argument and rebutting against it, he just that it was the same argument as everyone else. Better conduct goes to Pro for actually keeping the debate moving forward.

[*Reason for non-removal*] Arguments are sufficiently explained, examining BoP and its role in the debate as well as the use of arguments by both sides. The voter also explains conduct and has discretion to make this decision based on the logic given.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: TheBunnyAssassin// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: i dont like you religous ppl

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD. Just the voter"s opinion on religious people.
************************************************************************
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
Man, I love the smell of hypocrisy in the afternoon. Hell awaits, lads.
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
JayShay, you have said that before, but are too narcissistic to stop talking to me. You like the attention, even negative attention. It is part of your mental illness.

But, I do agree that a man who knows nothing cannot get anyone to accept any point he wishes to make.
Posted by squonk 10 months ago
squonk
@JayShay

You're right. I've already wasted too much time on this clown.
Posted by JayShay 10 months ago
JayShay
Guys, trying to get through to VR is pointless. Even me typing this will result in another rude comment from him. Let's just stop giving him the attention he craves.
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
I continue to be amazed by fools who deny Christ and reality are trying to tell me all about Him. Yes, they do deserve Hell.
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
I am rebuking arrogant, mentally ill pagans, hoping God save them from the wrath that is to come. But if He does not, so be it.
Posted by squonk 10 months ago
squonk
Do you want to save some souls? There are people out there who would love to be a part of Christianity: people looking for friendship, belonging, purpose, guidance, answers. Find those people. Show them some kindness and generosity. Be their friend. Respectfully share your beliefs with them, and listen while they respectfully share their beliefs with you. Don't call them "animals." Don't threaten them with eternal torture by fire. That stuff doesn't win anybody for Jesus. Stop being the epitome of everything people hate about Christianity.
Posted by squonk 10 months ago
squonk
I'm not participating in an insult war. What are you trying to accomplish here?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Bolas 10 months ago
Bolas
ViceRegentsquonkTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling/Grammar and sources are all tied. Spelling and Grammar could have been better on both sides of the debate. No sources were given on either side of the debate. Con never really made any arguments, and just put the BOP on the other person. When the other person attempted to explain, Con just denied it and said, "Try again." Points to Pro for actually making an argument. Conduct goes to Pro also for this reason. Pro made a valid point that Con refused to accept. He simply responded that Pro was using the exact same argument as everyone else. Instead of saying why that isn't a good argument and rebutting against it, he just that it was the same argument as everyone else. Better conduct goes to Pro for actually keeping the debate moving forward.