The Instigator
Randwot222
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
maxprimo
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

God exists!

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/25/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 478 times Debate No: 31668
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Randwot222

Con

The pro must state what "god" they are trying to prove exists and can start right away!
maxprimo

Pro

I choose not to begin immediately.

I will define god as it is in the third definition in the Merriam-webster online dictionary (1)

God:
noun
a person or thing of supreme value

I will be arguing that Nature is a think of suprime value and therefore god.

This is a valid god since you gave no definition of god.

Thank you

(1) http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Randwot222

Con

Very interesting choice! I thank you for this debate and lets get started!

Now you used this definition of god

(1)
God:
noun
a person or thing of supreme value

And you applied it to nature by saying that since nature is a thing of supreme value then it is therefore a god.

First I would like to look at the definition of value, since this is in your definition of god.

(2)
3: relative worth, utility, or importance

I will focus of the third definition of value since it is the one that most applies. The rest have to do with monetary value or numbers. So value means something of relative worth or importance, but this must be of supreme worth or importance in order to fit your definition. Lets see what your source has to say about nature since that is such a broad thing.

(3)
1
a: the inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing : essence
b: disposition, temperament

2
a: a creative and controlling force in the universe
b: an inner force or the sum of such forces in an individual

9: natural scenery

As we can see Nature covers a broad range of things ranging from personality, to the universe, to scenery. I have chosen a few of these and will breakdown each, giving my argument that they are not a supreme value as in your definition of god above.

1
a: the inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing : essence
b: disposition, temperament

Now the inherent character or basic constitution of a person is not of supreme value. Everyones personality is different and therefore has different value. We do not hold a child molesters inherent character in high value or the disposition of an abusive husband. In order for this type of "Nature" to be of "supreme" value all constitutions, temperament, and essences of people and thing must be important or have "supreme" worth.

2
a: a creative and controlling force in the universe
b: an inner force or the sum of such forces in an individual

Part A is the most interesting because you could tie in part B with what I said above for number 1. Now A is calling nature the creative and controlling force in the universe. This is not so because there are several forces not just one that keeps the universe going. (4)These are gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear. Without one or all of these different forces we could not live at least in this universe. Which is another problem with nature described as such, because there is a theory that these forces are environmental based on what universe you are in! ((5) The quote is below the philosophy artwork pic) So how could this force be the supreme importance when there could be an infinite number of different forces in different universes?

9: natural scenery

Now this, however nice, is not of supreme value. It just boils down to what natural scenery is worth to you and its importance. People in big cities try to get away from natural scenery and thrive in a man made environment, and thus it is not of importance to them. I personally like some natural scenery, but I like to visit not live in it.

I have taken your definition that nature is a supreme value and therefore god and given my counter arguments that nature as described above is not a supreme value. You have given a very interesting god to debate and I look forward to your response! I would like you to counter my three definitions of nature and their value since this was your definition. You made me think on this one and thank you again for your choice!

(1)http://www.merriam-webster.com...
(2)http://www.merriam-webster.com...
(3)http://www.merriam-webster.com...
(4)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(5)http://www.theatlantic.com...
maxprimo

Pro

maxprimo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Randwot222

Con

Just like spiderman says in Family Guy, "Everybody gets one". Round forfeit that is. You may still post a response!
maxprimo

Pro

maxprimo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Randwot222

Con

You're turn still!
maxprimo

Pro

maxprimo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Randwot222

Con

I wish we could of continued this debate because it would of been an interesting one. Thanks for your time though!
maxprimo

Pro

maxprimo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.