The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
The Contender
CraftyMiscreant
Pro (for)

How do atheists rationally know truth from fiction?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
CraftyMiscreant has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/18/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 413 times Debate No: 98201
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

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?

THIS DEBATE IS ONLY FOR ATHEISTS.

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.
CraftyMiscreant

Pro

I will gladly accept this debate.

Before we can get into the meat and potatoes of this debate, however, I would like to ask my opponent to define what "Truth" is and what "Fiction" is before we can continue.

I would also like him to define what he means by "atheists" so that we can have our terms straight.

Also, I would like him to elaborate on what he means by science. Does he mean the entire method? Does he mean philosophy as well? How about everyday testing we do in our day to day lives?

Also, I would like him to define what he means by the word fiction. Does he mean things we know that are patently false and things we know are beyond a reasonable doubt made up, or does he mean derriving some sort of narrative from fictitious works from authors and artists?

I would love to get into this, but I need these terms specifically defined in order to have a productive conversation.

Merry Christmas.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

As this fool failed to answer my Q, he loses the debate.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by CraftyMiscreant 1 year ago
CraftyMiscreant
Yeah you didn't define your terms about what you meant. I was asking for clarity and you didn't deliver. Not wasting my time on this one.
Posted by Sidetrack 1 year ago
Sidetrack
This guy will only begin to understand he is wrong when he tries to make a formal deductive argument. His stance is impossible to state is a valid way. He thinks validy is questionable.
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
Sorry, I was the 6th...
http://www.debate.org...
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
I was one of the first to debate him, I believe the 8th on this topic, and he basically gives up.
He also forfeited an evolution debate I had with him...he sux a lot of balls.
Posted by ca2005 1 year ago
ca2005
You know what I hate about this guy? He's done this debate more than 10 times or so, and he still continues to ask this question. AND IT HAS BEEN ANSWERED.
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
How does truth fictionally know rationality from atheists?
This question oddly has more meaning than the resolution.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.