The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
The Contender
Unstobbaple
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: 1/26/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 744 times Debate No: 99350
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
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.

NOTE TO ALL YOU LOSERS POSTING COMMENTS. IF I DO NOT THINK YOU COMMENT ADD ANYTHING RATIONAL TO THE DISCUSSION OR I CANNNOT USE IT TO MOCK YOU, I DO NOT BOTHER RESPONDING
Unstobbaple

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

And you lose for failing to answer the Q. Next?
Unstobbaple

Pro

I mean this sincerely and it's clear you need a little dose of your own talk. It would take half a decent debater to show up drunk for the last round to present arguments that negate yours and you do have the burden of proof.

Respond to obvious defeating arguments before you waste my time.

I'll reference an argument that you could not refute:

"Allow me to explain how myself as an atheist, rationally deduces truth from fiction. It's like this, I'll use an example to explain it.

The way I ascertain the truth of any claim, is by taking what I know about the claim compared to what has been factually verified, very simply. For example Johnny Cuckold says that the orange that is not in the fridge is the color orange, and yet I have no proof of disproof of this claim. What I do have is previous scientific knowledge of the fact that the orange is a fruit, and it is the color orange. So with this I can operate under a presumption but not a 100% certainty that what he has told me is true. However if I did not have this previous knowledge, the rational position would be to be agnostic on this, or neutral so to speak, as I both have no anecdotal or hard evidence for this orange being the color orange or not, but also have no previous logical scientific knowledge, so logically can not have a strong position on this outside of an assumption. However one I open the fridge, I can, using my sense of sight, verify the color of the orange, so in fact let's say the orange was in fact orange, using this concoction of both my previous knowledge and what I have just observed, I can deduce that that the claim made by Johnny Cuckold is true [1]."

[1] http://www.debate.org...

Your mind got broke on that. Pls respond to basic arguments about your position before you assume you know anything about it. Good day sir.
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
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Unstobbaple 1 year ago
Unstobbaple
@Ray next time some arrogant newb spouts off insulting my friends and explaining how smart s/he is and I decide I'll provide a lesson I'll post this as fair warning to tempt them to think a bit before they start outing themselves as a terrible person: https://www.youtube.com...
Posted by Unstobbaple 1 year ago
Unstobbaple
*fifth grade mentor xD
Posted by Unstobbaple 1 year ago
Unstobbaple
Hopefully he now realizes he's an idiot and is seeking a fifth mentor to restart his education.
Posted by RayOConnor 1 year ago
RayOConnor
The creator of this debate got owned so badly...
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
But why create foot number 3, (theisme)...
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Of course it makes no sense at all..
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
I can..Truth or fiction..
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
I can..Truth or fiction..
Posted by Unstobbaple 1 year ago
Unstobbaple
@Catdiss that question is completely solipsistic. No one can answer it if you can't.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Left foot in left shoe..It feels good... Truth or fiction..
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.