How do atheists rationally know truth from fiction?
Debate Rounds (5)
And please do not respond if you have responded before or if all you have is "science", 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 circular reasoning is not rational.
Shakespeare had a point. Which is, shortly put; we who derive our perceptions of reality from that selfsame existence, can with no factual basis prove the existence or nonexistence of anything whatsoever.
That being said, what does religion do that magically makes you immune to this? Any person who believes in God, or really any other metaphysical entity, removing all physical proof, which relies upon the senses, has only faith to justify that belief.
I say unto all those who would look away from the truth, in favor of the comforting lie which we hold so dear; there is nothing. There has never been anything. Reality is as we define it, and no other. 'Cogito Est, Ergo Est.'
I think it is, therefore it is.
If reality is subjective to perception, and perception is subjective to the human mind, than to tell a lie is merely to amend reality. Thus, a believer of God in the metaphysical sense is no different than an atheist; both are captured in the illusion of reality.
I believe Jesus once said, "If you had faith the size of a mustard seed, you would command that tree to be uprooted, and so it would be."
Mind over matter. There is no spoon. We define our own reality.
This is the only truth that matters. What most of us know to be the truth is, in fact, fiction.
People I know atheists are mentally ill. I do not need confirmation from atheists. This dude loses the debate. Moving on.
Seeing as you would rather bluster about my argument's 'insanity' than refute it, I must conclude therefore that you cannot.
And seeing as the fact that you have not refuted (and therefore cannot refute) my argument would make me the winner of this debate, I do hereby claim this victory by the accorded rules by which you have agreed to abide.
Furthermore, I would state that any individual who lacks the self control to construct a logical argument is not morally fit to refute the argument of an unbiased source. Seeing as I am Agnostic, I am therefore not biased for or against the existence of god, but rather I choose to believe that our reality is subjective to human choice. Make no mistake; I am not agreeing with you. I am simply stating that not only are atheists unable to know what is or is not the truth, but that also any individual who is bound by the structures of our reality cannot decisively prove anything. It does not matter what you believe; it is impossible to know the 'truth' from 'fiction.'
Either you will logically refute my claim, or the debate is mine.
If you continue to proceed in this illogical manner, you will, as they say, 'dig your own grave.'
While we can recognize that our reality is subjective, we are not exempt from it. We have both chosen to heed these rules, and by the rules of structured debate, you have not refuted my claim.
I sustain my earlier objection; do not concern yourself with my assertions before your own. Before you can refute my claims, please support yours.
Or if you so choose, please. By all means. Do attempt to refute my claims. I have not yet seen any evidence against them.
You are quibbling over semantics, not debating. Please debate.
Not knowing this, of your response I can only observe a restatement of my own.
I take this as an invitation to move on.
Thus, I state; In conclusion, because our perceptions of reality are not admissible evidence as to the nature of that reality, then it is impossible to tell fact from fiction. Yes, it is impossible for atheists. No, it does not matter if you are or are not an atheist, as spiritual preference is merely a factor within, and not exempt from, human perception, and thus God may be either spiritual or factual.
And in summation, to restate my thesis; It is impossible to tell fact from fiction, no matter to which religion you pay homage.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by matt8800 9 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con has BOP and did not once provide the rationale for his argument. Nobody knows why he believes his assertion to be true.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.