The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
fishfish77
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

How do atheists ratiionally 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 1 vote the winner is...
ViceRegent
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/5/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 284 times Debate No: 92362
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

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.
fishfish77

Pro

atheists can rationally know truth from fiction by testing hypothesis with experiments. that relies on observations and the senses. they can check if their observations and senses are correct by asking others if they are observing and sensing the same things as they are. if they are not then that would mean they would be hallucinating or the other people are telling lies which they would have to figure out by asking more people. atheists can know the truth about people by polling them, asking them and observing them. when it comes to controversial subjects if it is objective it can be known. if it is subjective and based on peoples opinions only then they can know their opinions and find out what the normal and abnormal opinions are.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

Even this dude sees he is begging the question, for for his method to work, he must know that his senses are telling him the truth and that others are not lying to him. His solution to this logic error is base truth on what the population says, which is the ad populism fallacy. In other words, this dude has no rational way to know truth from fiction, which means his atheism has left him utterly ignorant.
fishfish77

Pro

what other way is there to know anything besides what people say and what you observe and sense with your senses. Christians believe what people say in the bible. atheists believe what people say about science as long as they can observe it themselves. how could Christians know truth from fiction if they can't believe anything people say.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

I agree with you completely that the only tool the atheist has is rationality. This is why no reasonable person is an atheist. To be an atheist one must embrace absurdity. By God's grace, I choose not to do that because I don't want to check my mind at the door.
fishfish77

Pro

fishfish77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ViceRegent

Con

Another one bites the dust.
fishfish77

Pro

fishfish77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
ViceRegent

Con

Not one of these atheists can answer this question.
fishfish77

Pro

fishfish77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by missmedic 6 months ago
missmedic
lord_megatron
Con never made an argument. A question was asked but no argument was ever made, as always this was never a debate.......
Posted by ViceRegent 6 months ago
ViceRegent
Apparently "lord megatron" is as irrational as pro.
Posted by ViceRegent 6 months ago
ViceRegent
Apparently "lord megatron" is as irrational as pro.
Posted by missmedic 6 months ago
missmedic
Fish
Here is one of his thoughts;
"The problem is that outside of the moral framework imposed by the Christian God, there is no such thing as rights."
So if you don't think and believe like him your wrong, ignorant and foolish.
Your dealing with a very bent and deluded ego, this person has done this same debate almost a hundred times, losing all and yet he declares himself the winner, this should tell you something about how his mind works.................................good luck.
Posted by ViceRegent 6 months ago
ViceRegent
Fish, do not worry about what this harpy says. I exposed her as an irrationalist and stopped responding to her. Now she trolls my every post with her inanities.
Posted by missmedic 6 months ago
missmedic
Fish
The person you are debating is a TROLL, that does not debate, and does not how to debate. Have a look for yourself...............
http://www.debate.org...
Welcome to DDO...........
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lord_megatron 6 months ago
lord_megatron
ViceRegentfishfish77Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited and con's arguments were more convincing