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

How do atheists rationally know truth from fiction?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
ViceRegent
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 479 times Debate No: 88307
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (18)
Votes (2)

 

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.
ChallengeEx

Pro

Truth is something which was expressed after having been discovered , fiction is something that is discovered after it has been expressed.

God is something which has never been discovered until people are told about him, thus he/she/it doesn't represent a truth. If later on he/she/it is discovered that would make discussions of the observation truth but god itself would still be fiction to those whom hadn't themselves discovered it.

I think the most important aspect of truth is knowing when not to dish it out, the most important aspect of fiction is knowing how to dish it out to do so more often.

Truth is something which was expressed after having been discovered , fiction is something that is discovered after it has been expressed.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

Good grief. Can you fools not read. I did not ask for definitions, but his you know truth from fiction. Strike 1.
ChallengeEx

Pro

You really are dumb aren't you, Estimating the number of atheists in the U.S. is complicated. Some adults who describe themselves as atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit. At the same time, some people who identify with a religion (e.g., say they are Protestant, Catholic or Jewish) also say they do not believe in God.

But one thing is for sure: Along with the rise of religiously unaffiliated Americans (many of whom believe in God), there has been a corresponding increase in the number of atheists. Here are a few facts about this group and their beliefs:

1.
The share of Americans who identify as atheists has roughly doubled in the past several years. Pew Research Center"s 2014 Religious Landscape Study found that 3.1% of American adults say they are atheists when asked about their religious identity, up from 1.6% in a similarly large survey in 2007. An additional 4.0% of Americans call themselves agnostics, up from 2.4% in 2007.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

Strike 2. Another unreasoning animal has reared its ugly, ignorant head.
ChallengeEx

Pro

ChallengeEx forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ViceRegent

Con

ViceRegent forfeited this round.
ChallengeEx

Pro

ChallengeEx forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: milesk12// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Viceregent does it again.

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD, just a statement of disapproval for Con.
************************************************************************
Posted by milesk12 8 months ago
milesk12
Petition the site admins to throw a celebration once ViceRegent gets to 50 reposts!

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by ChallengeEx 8 months ago
ChallengeEx
I agree with Ragnar!
Posted by Ragnar 8 months ago
Ragnar
Your questions for him, and his Pew Research Center copy/paste.
Posted by ViceRegent 8 months ago
ViceRegent
My Qs?
Posted by Ragnar 8 months ago
Ragnar
Both of you, please maintain the civility of neither insulting each other in the comment section, nor posting debate arguments in the comment section.
Posted by ChallengeEx 8 months ago
ChallengeEx
It is true.
Posted by ChallengeEx 8 months ago
ChallengeEx
The share of Americans who identify as atheists has roughly doubled in the past several years. Pew Research Center"s 2014 Religious Landscape Study found that 3.1% of American adults say they are atheists when asked about their religious identity, up from 1.6% in a similarly large survey in 2007. An additional 4.0% of Americans call themselves agnostics, up from 2.4% in 2007.
Posted by griffinbrincefield 8 months ago
griffinbrincefield
get to the smut already!
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 8 months ago
WhineyMagiciann5
how do you rationally know your bible is true vice? since you seem SSOOO superior, it should be easy.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 8 months ago
Ragnar
ViceRegentChallengeExTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Plagiarism... Pro's R2 after the opening insult was copy/pasted (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/05/7-facts-about-atheists/). Had it not been for that he would have won on the grounds of BoP (everything that follows is the writeup prior to spotting the cheating; it would have been further refined and added to, but no reason to throw out the feedback even after it became irrelevant)... Conduct for forfeiting less rounds (sticking in another round could have bridged arguments). Pro's repetition at the start and end of R1 hurt his credibility slightly, but his case was framed well enough; he knows truth from fiction based on personal discovery (ironic since his statistics would be called fiction to him)... Instead of the promised cross examination, con accused pro of being multiple illiterate people in an Ad Hominem attack, which in no way suggested any reason pro had failed to answer the question. Pro's response was taking the bait on insults, and doing side bandwagon appeal
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 8 months ago
dsjpk5
ViceRegentChallengeExTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Tie