The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
The Contender
Ozzz169
Pro (for)

How do atheists rationally 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  
Debate Round Forfeited
ViceRegent has forfeited round #3.
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: 12/30/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 259 times Debate No: 98547
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
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?

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.
Ozzz169

Pro

Definition - Truth is something that is objectively real in the physical world regardless of the observation and interpretation of the event.

If you are using a different definition I think you have already lost, as your whole argument is based on manipulation the meaning of the word Truth, as such your argument is already nothing but a semantical argument, and atheism is not relevant. Your supposition should be truth is..... and atheist cant believe that, then this is a nonsensical redefintion of words that can not be rebutted. I could just as easily define truth as something that no one that believes in god(s) can know because they believe in unprovable, unobservable, etc. entities, and thus no ability to use logic.

Clarification:

I understand it as you are saying that without belief in god(s) you cannot know what is truth and what is fiction, implying that if you believe in a god(s) you gain some special insight into what is true and what is fiction.

To this I would have to ask the following, how are you gaining this special knowledge from which any belief in any god(s) can impart?


If this is knowledge is passed by any god -

Surely one who worships Satan as God is being imparted with a different truth than a Christian, which would negate the definition of truth presented, unless your arguing this special knowledge to these opposing groups is equivalent, and that is a mighty high burden of proof for you to overcome.


If only YOUR God gives this knowledge -

If I only can know what truth is from the God you are claiming to derive your knowledge of truth from then I would ask why can none of the other gods grant this knowledge? Furthermore, how can you rationally reject the knowledge of all the other gods and not your God? The only difference between you and an atheist is that they have reject one additional god than you have, and essentially your argument is void from the start, as you have already reject the Truth that all other gods impart on those that believe them.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

So many wasted words and not one that answers the question. This fool loses the debate. Next?
Ozzz169

Pro

This was just practice, it is obvious from your "argument" that you have no clue about Debating and what not. it is a clear answer without using science. you have an arbitrary short character count so I could not add more. But, basically atheism does not have to answer the question any different than anyone else, unless you prove there is some reason they do.

So the answer is so obvious it does not need stated, but for you I will state it as you seem a bit dense (sorry for the ad hominem but evidence supports this conclusion), THE SAME WAY AS ANYONE THAT BELIEVES IN ANY GOD DOES. You have to prove this to be wrong or your argument is void. I have already destroyed your possible rebuttals to this answer, but impress me and anyone reading, prove that believing in ANY god(s) gains a person special knowledge on truth and the ability to distinguish it from fiction.
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
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Ozzz169 1 year ago
Ozzz169
He is a complete fool, and knows nothing about debate or arguing. I was just practicing my debating skills. I figured he was too pathetic to put forth any ration case or rebuttal.
Posted by zupermushy 1 year ago
zupermushy
this guy is absolute grbage. he thinks hes the greatest make some stupid rul elike lets talk currncy sorry ruoles re cant talk about moey
Posted by Frederik 1 year ago
Frederik
Considering his 13% "win" ratio makes me wonder if he even understands the concept of losing.
Posted by illegalcombat 1 year ago
illegalcombat
If atheists can't explain (insert thing here), and then I claim God did it, do I win ?

Because that is how it works right, if smelly atheists can't explain, therefore God, right ?
This debate has 2 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.