The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
quertyfoo
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

How do atheists rationally know truth from fiction?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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: 3/2/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 680 times Debate No: 87503
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (42)
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.
quertyfoo

Pro

What is truth or fiction? As Decartes said, "I think, therefore I am." Can anyone truly define truth? Truth is what is observed. How does one ascertain whether something is truth? Many people, observing. Reality can only be defined in terms of what we observe.

In addition, truth is that which can be logically determined from observation.

It is fine to hypothesize or insist on something that transcends observations. However, anything other than observations may or may not be true, since truth is defined by observation. Therefore, it does not make sense to call something true if it cannot be observed.

You say not to appeal to science. Science is the search for explanation and deeper understanding of that which may be observed. It can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. However, to insist that one can prove the unprovable, that which exists outside observation, is not unscientific, it is illogical, and as such cannot be considered truth.

((I am Catholic/Agnostic, depending on my mood, and a supporter and lover of science.))
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

How do you know your observations are valid?
quertyfoo

Pro

quertyfoo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

Another one bites the dust.
quertyfoo

Pro

quertyfoo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
quertyfoo

Pro

quertyfoo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
quertyfoo

Pro

quertyfoo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by JaanVahl 9 months ago
JaanVahl
Commenting to disable notifications.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 9 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
Its not proof by definition. Proof : something which shows that something else is true or correct
You would have to show how and bring more of these examples
Also vice, that ladt comment of yours shows major hypocrisy to the level that shows you are a troll.
Posted by ViceRegent 9 months ago
ViceRegent
Again, it is not proof because this fool says it is not proof, which, ironically, is more proof of my claim. I am putting this tool back on ignore.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 9 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
Its not proof as that statment you mafe earlier is false Posted by "ViceRegent 55 minutes ago
ViceRegent Notice now this fool wants me to prove to him that he is egotistical, as if it his judgment on my proof determines the thing. There is my proof. ROFL."
When i ask for you to prove im egotistical, that means brings examples of my actions. Proof would be undeniable by any party.
So if you could bring examples of me being egotistical i could bring several different parties and they could judge.
Posted by ViceRegent 9 months ago
ViceRegent
And why is it not proof? Because this fool says so. The fact of the matter is that in every courtroom across the nation, I could put the fool on the state to establish he is egotistical, including by his own words. Thus, not only does he prove me right yet again, he is ignorant as to what proof is. But tell him. Reality would only confuse him.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 9 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
Thats not proof vice. Thats your attempt at escaping the question. Let me help you "i know whineymagician5 is egotistical because____________". Should be simple for you.
Posted by ViceRegent 9 months ago
ViceRegent
Notice now this fool wants me to prove to him that he is egotistical, as if it his judgment on my proof determines the thing. There is my proof. ROFL.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 9 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
Prove im egotistical then vice.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 9 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
@difference. Its fine. Everything requires some explanation.
Posted by difference 9 months ago
difference
@WhineyMagiciann I see. You're right, I didn't consider that
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 9 months ago
U.n
ViceRegentquertyfooTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.