The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
imjustsomeopinion
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Are Atheists Able to Know Reality from Delusion?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The Voting Period Ends In
07days11hours14minutes29seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/1/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 days ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 182 times Debate No: 97544
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

ViceRegent

Con

Atheists love to live under the delusion that they are the guardians of rationality. But how can they hold this title when they cannot even articulate a rational way to know truth from fiction. If they cannot do this, they are literally ignorant and the ignorant cannot guard anything. So, what atheist can give me a rational way atheists know truth from fiction?

Answering this question is the sole purpose for this debate. If you are unable or unwilling to answer this question, do not respond to this debate. Likewise, if you do not believe in reality, believe you make it up or deny it is objective or knowable, or if you do not know how to rationally know truth from fiction, do not respond to this debate. If you are terrified of cross-examination or madly in love with red herrings, do not respond to this debate. If you have responded before, do not respond to this debate. After all, if you had nothing rational to say then, you will having nothing rational to say now.

If all you have is "science", do not respond to this debate, for science relies on the your senses and reason, which begs the question of how you know your senses and reason are valid. Perhaps you can tell me, which is fine, but if the way you validate you senses and reason is with your senses and reason, you lose the debate because that is circular reasoning and circular reasoning is not rational.

if you respond in violation of these rules, you automatically lose the debate.
imjustsomeopinion

Pro

I'm going to apologize to everyone for my grammar right off the bat.

First off, who are you to say what every atheist believes? Judging by what you say i doubt your an atheist. You can't speak for an entire group of people just because you think your right. I'm an atheist, and I'd never call myself a guardian of rationality, all i can claim is that i am able to think rationally like other people can. As for knowing delusions from reality, no one can do that. There is always the argument that our senses are failing us and so we can never know if we are really in reality, so i'll admit that i can't tell reality from delusions because no one can and if i did claim i could, i'd be lying. Since we can't tell the difference between delusion and reality the only thing we can do is use what we have to the best of our abilities. what we do have is our senses, and our senses tell us we are here in reality. sure, there is no way to be certain, but even the tiniest chance that we are right is better than none. if we use what we have (our senses) and fail then at least we tried. if we refuse to use our senses because there is always a chance that we will be wrong then we will never accomplish anything. your claim that not knowing delusion from reality is ignorant is an ignorant claim in itself. The only thing we can do is know what is true and what is false to the best of our abilities. I'm assuming you believe you can prove that you know delusion from reality since you singled out a specific group. So tell me, what is your way of knowing delusion from reality?

no offense, I've seen you post this question time and time again, how about this time instead of trying to end the debate early by saying that i lose and refusing to do more you actually respond to my questions.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

Round 1 makes it clear that if you cannot know fact from fiction you are not to respond to this debate. This fool violated this rule and, therefore, loses the debate. Ironically, he proves himself an irrational fool when he claims he cannot know reality from delusion but then makes a claim about reality (that everyone shares his ignorance). I win. Moviing on.
imjustsomeopinion

Pro

perhaps i wasn't clear enough when i said you should actually try and answer my questions instead of just saying you win, who wins is up to the voters.

we can know reality from delusion to the best of our ability. which I acknowledge is not 100%, but that is better than (and not at all) none.

you claim you've already won but in your first argument you claimed that anyone who can't tell reality from delusion is ignorant meaning one of two thing: 1) you think you have a 100% perfect way of telling reality from delusion, or 2) you think everyone (including yourself) is ignorant because they can't do the impossible. I disagree with both of these and you need to clarify which it is and the reason you believe it to be true.

i would appreciate an actual response to this.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

Is it true that you can know truth from fiction by the best of your ability? How do you know?
imjustsomeopinion

Pro

Because our sense constantly lead us to answers that we can apply to our lives that work out. Whether we are currently living in reality or a delusion we cant know 100%. But we can know that, for example, yes will always mean yes in this reality/delusion. No matter what way it is shown( different languages,signs,sounds, etc.) there is always a way to convey a message with the same meaning as the word "yes". Certain things in this life will always have a way of conveying a message that will never change. Of course, this is just me using what i know to the best of my ability.

You still haven't answered any of my questions. No offense, but I believe it is YOU who is afraid of cross examination.

If you can't answer the question that i have then just ignore them in your final round, if you can then respond to them.

here was my question: "you claim you've already won but in your first argument you claimed that anyone who can't tell reality from delusion is ignorant meaning one of two thing: 1) you think you have a 100% perfect way of telling reality from delusion, or 2) you think everyone (including yourself) is ignorant because they can't do the impossible. I disagree with both of these and you need to clarify which it is and the reason you believe it to be true".
Debate Round No. 3
ViceRegent

Con

You said, "Because our sense constantly lead us to answers that we can apply to our lives that work out."

How do you know they work out apart from your senses? If you must rely on your senses, then you are guilty of circular reasoning, making your epistemology irrationally, as I said in my Round 1. If something else, then you rely on your something else, not your senses, which means you lied to me. Either way, you know nothing. This is why only a deluded fool would be an atheist.
imjustsomeopinion

Pro

First off I'd like to say that you've done nothing but be rude and ignore questions which i do not appreciate. Second, you have commented how anyone who can not tell the difference between reality is a fool but wont explain why that is and how YOU know the difference between delusion and reality. You refuse to use the only tools you have to find anything in this life. Also, how does your previous argument explain why you should not be an atheist? Since you haven't explained how you know the difference between reality and delusion and you are obviously not an atheist, you haven't really made any valid points for that case either. I have not lied to you once in this debate and I've done what i can to try and make my point. I get where your coming from but you've got to realize that not everything can be 100% in life. you'll have to roll with some maybes and that's just the way it is. I appreciate the chance to debate with you, but please try to be more polite in future debates.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Swisstelligence 2 days ago
Swisstelligence
Hey guys, I'm new on this site. How do you vote?
Under the votes tab it says voting is open but i can't find where you can actually vote.
Posted by imjustsomeopinion 2 days ago
imjustsomeopinion
@jonbonbon well said and thank you.
Posted by Jonbonbon 2 days ago
Jonbonbon
ViceRegent, coming from an entirely Christian point of view: science has a crap ton of validity. If God created a universe bigger than we can see the end of and a world we still have yet to completely explore, what makes you think the study of that is not important?

If you don't believe that senses can be trusted, how do you know what the Bible says? How do you know that you've heard the message preached correctly. How do you know that your experience with God and the world is the most valid out of anyone else's?

Essentially, you're relying on the physical things way too much to discard the study of it. And that's okay, because God created us as physical beings on a physical planet. It's ridiculous to think that none of this matters.

Science is important, atheists (according the the Bible) can be good people too, and atheists can see the world for what it is better than a lot of the religious community does most of the time.
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
God is mine..lol
Posted by Swisstelligence 2 days ago
Swisstelligence
lol
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
You can not just say LOL...Your god does not like that..And there fore you must go to hell i think...LOL.
Posted by imjustsomeopinion 2 days ago
imjustsomeopinion
lol
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
"Well said! is a nother crap...religion..
Posted by imjustsomeopinion 2 days ago
imjustsomeopinion
well said @swissintelligence
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
No. They just have no religion....
No votes have been placed for this debate.