The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ozzie
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

How do atheists raitnally know truth from fiction?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Ozzie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 467 times Debate No: 99121
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

ViceRegent

Con

IF YOU ARE UNABLE OR UNWILLING TO READ THIS WHOLE POST AND THEN RESPOND TO THE SINGLE QUESTION IT ASKS, GO AWAY. I FIND IT HILARIOUS THAT THESE ATHEISTS KEEP VOMITING WORDS AND YET NOT ONE HAS ANSWERED MY Q.

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, BY WHAT METHOD DOES ANY ATHEIST CLAIM TO RATIONALLY KNOW TRUTH FROM FICTION?

Answering this question is the sole purpose for this debate. I have even put it in capital letters for those to dense to get it. 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.
Ozzie

Pro

Just doing this debate for voting privileges mmkay
Incase your actually serious about debating this, no one can truely determine 'truth' from 'fiction' at this point in humanity. I've never heard of an atheist claiming to be a 'guardian of rationality'. However, atheists trust modern science and the Big Bang theory (I don't understand it but hey, I'm agnostic) rather than a two and a half thousand year-old book that conveniently explains all the questions we have about the universe with a magical and unquestionable spirit. Atheism seems more rational to me, as a person who doesn't believe strongly in either ideology (although I DO believe in science, if science is something to be 'believed in')
You'll probably just call me a moron but seriously, maybe you should think about this (assuming you're not a troll).
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

As this fool admits that he has no way to know truth from fiction, he concedes the debate. Next?
Ozzie

Pro

This fool (i.e. me) says atheists have no way of telling truth from fiction, and neither do Christians or any other religious folk. However, atheism is more rational, as it uses the findings of science to explain the world around us, instead of an historical belief that is impossible to prove but also (conveniently) impossible to disprove.
I've answered your question. But incase your 'to dense' (to reuse your grammar) to understand it, I'll make it clear.
"How do atheists raitnally [sic] know truth from fiction?" They don't, and any athiest worth their salt doesn't. I've experienced Christianity and atheism, and the latter seems more rational to me.
I don't concede. If you address my arguments and tear them apart, you win. It wouldn't be hard to do so, as you can see I've put in very little effort.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

Notice this fool says he has no idea what truth is, but then expect us to take him seriously when he says it is true that Christians do not either. ROFL. Yep, another atheist fool proves God right when God says atheists are unreasoning animals.
Ozzie

Pro

If that floats your boat.
Also, I'm an agnostic Christian not an atheist.
Debate Round No. 3
ViceRegent

Con

What you are is a mentally ill reprobate. I will waste no more time on you.
Ozzie

Pro

It's been a pleasure. I'm now one debate off voting privileges so thx.
I seriously hope you're not a 47 year old man like your profile says, because this has been a little bit like debating a two year old.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by John_C_1812 1 year ago
John_C_1812
Truth does not require evidence. People require evidence to believe truth. OK the spoiler here might be.
How do atheist rationally know truth from fiction?

1. When they are rational, and not irrational.

The Irony to the question. Is that the non-atheist waits for GOD to give them the answer, so they are never wrong they simply misunderstood GOD.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 1 year ago
FollowerofChrist1955
You should attend this debate:
Atheism- A lost reality! A hopeless, helpless cause!
Posted by KnowledgeBot5 1 year ago
KnowledgeBot5
truth requires evidence, fiction requires belief and imagination, rationalizing only gets you so far as it can be applied to truth and fiction. To know each of us are unique in how we process what we hear, see, smell, touch and taste and even in our senses, exist varying differences between us. how difficult it is, comprehension, interpretation, are processes that are also unique to each of us and yet we use all them all of the time, to help make sense of the world we live in. uniqueness within helps or hinders what we come to understand. IMO, this why religion and science exists. for those who can comprehend the complexities of biology and science -vs- those who find it much easier to chalk it all up to a creator, a god- In the end, to each his own. if the world and everything around it makes better sense to you through religion or science, then that is your choice, that you may have arrived at, by limited knowledge or by born into one of many religions- "an atheist only believes in one less god then you do" - (I'm not sure who actually said that) :)
Posted by Ozzie 1 year ago
Ozzie
Oh don't worry lacov I've been watching this guy's debates, very intriguing...
Posted by Iacov 1 year ago
Iacov
@Ozzie welcome to debate.org unfortunately you have chosen to accept the debate of this special little problem.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Left foot in left shoe..It feels good... Truth or fiction..
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by DStallman 1 year ago
DStallman
ViceRegentOzzieTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This should be the obvious choice.
Vote Placed by debatemaster163 1 year ago
debatemaster163
ViceRegentOzzieTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was simply insulting pro, sometimes in all caps. Pro completely wins.