The Instigator
thecynicalreader
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JohnMaynardKeynes
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

God does not exist and is simply wish fulfillment

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 3 votes the winner is...
JohnMaynardKeynes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 54446
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

thecynicalreader

Pro

I believe that there is no God and the concept of a deity is simply wish fulfillment
JohnMaynardKeynes

Con

I accept this debate and will be arguing Con for the following resolution:


"God does not exist and is simply wish fulfillment"

At this point I would like to point out that Pro bears the burden of proof in this debate. He must prove to us conclusivley that God does not exist and cannot exist -- that God is in fact impossible. I must only neutralize his arguments and demonstrate that God is a possibility, and that it isn't possible to prove a negative of this nature, in order to win.

The fact of the matter, though, is that Pro cannot fulfill his burden of proof; it is impossible to do so. The question of whether God exists does not possess truth value; this is to say that we cannot prove the statement "God exists" true or false because we lack the available information. If God exists, he exists the parameters of the natural world and thus isn't evident to our own senses. So disproving him -- which is Pro's burden -- is impossible.

Now, Pro could argue that there is no evidence for God, and he would be right. However, my burden in this debate is not to demonstrate that God does exist, but that he could exist. The chief burden is in proving a negative.


With that, I pass back over to Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
thecynicalreader

Pro

thecynicalreader forfeited this round.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Con

My opponent has forfeitted, which is unfortunate. I'll give him another chance to respond, especially because he has the burden of proof in this debate.

At this point, I'll extend my main premise: he cannot uphold this resolution becasue it is based on a positive statement which does not possess truth value since we cannot prove a negative.
Debate Round No. 2
thecynicalreader

Pro

thecynicalreader forfeited this round.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Con

Unfortunately my opponent has forfeited without making an argument.

Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
BoP is an odd subject, which no two members seem to be wholly agreed on. I tend to view it as shared unless otherwise stated, while I have seen members state that it's impossible for it to be shared. I also think it is not the lone standard for voting, but a base standard to consider a case (was enough relevant information presented, for the argument to be coherent if unchallenged?). Once both sides have met that low standard, it falls to DDO voting standards:

"Who made more convincing arguments?(3 Points)
Analysis - Which debater, on balance, did a better job of clearly explaining their arguments and of exposing the weakness of their opponent's arguments?
Refutation - Which debater critically analyzed their opponents' arguments the best and developed clear, appropriate, and understandable responses?
Organization - Which debater organized their arguments the best, creating an easily understood and readable path to follow?"
Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes 2 years ago
JohnMaynardKeynes
Thank you for your explanation, Ragnar. I largely agree with your assessment. I think BOP, in this case, generally ought to be evaluated in terms of reasonable doubt and so forth, but I wouldn't even mind the idea that another member brought up in the forums (I wish I could recall his name) about basing BOP on a preponderence of evidence, which I think is generally what you're suggesting.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
1. People try to rely on BoP too much. Even were it solely on con, con's arguments remain stronger by the DDO standard.

2. Pro decided to have two separate issues in the resolution. Were one of them on con, the other "is simply wish fulfillment" would still be on pro, as that is most clearly a positive statement.

3. Yes I only voted conduct, as in cases of FF, I do not consider arguments worth in depth evaluation when they cannot possibly lead to the side who FFed.
Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes 2 years ago
JohnMaynardKeynes
To build the point further, though, it's logically incoherent for the BOP to be on me. I'm not saying that God exists. I'm saying that it's POSSIBLE and that Pro can't prove that he doesn't.
Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes 2 years ago
JohnMaynardKeynes
@rdoco: First of all, that isn't true at all. The burden of proof is always on the person making a positive statement -- the alternate hypothesis.

Not to mention, that wasn't agreed upon in the debate, so the burden always falls on the instigator making a positive affirmation. If I negate the resolution, he can't win. Please don't vote with respect to your own conception of the BOP, especially when it's backed by nothing. I will report all votebombs.
Posted by rdococ 2 years ago
rdococ
The burden of proof is not on the Pro. It is on the Con, due to the null hypothesis.
Posted by The_Intangible 2 years ago
The_Intangible
This is definitely an argument in which Con would be the easier position to take were the debate set up as the question "Does God Exist?"

As it is, Pro has really shot himself in the foot from the get go, for reasons already specified by Con.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
thecynicalreaderJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
thecynicalreaderJohnMaynardKeynesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Basically a full forfeit from Pro. Conduct for the forfeits. Arguments to Con for actually presenting some. No sources were used, and S&G, what little Pro gave, was equal enough. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
thecynicalreaderJohnMaynardKeynesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.