The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Is atheism illogical

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 473 times Debate No: 89018
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




I think atheism is quite logical,any creationist or any other religion dudes that think either way,and if you feel that way than come on show me why atheism is wrong is illogical?


I accept this debate.

I myself was an agnostic for a while, so I am just pointing out a few inconsistencies.

I will be arguing that

1. Morality cannot exist via a Naturalist perspective.

This does not mean Atheists cannot be moral if morality exists, but instead that a naturalist reality negates all metaphysical realities, including ethical or moral absolutes.

2. You cannot be a pure Atheist.

This will be argued both from an empiricist and rationalist perspective. You cannot really make the truth statement that there is no God.

3. Atheism is based on a faulty epistemology.

I will argue that from a naturalistic perspective, you cannot find absolute truth using the tools most commonly asserted as absolute by many Atheists, specifically scientism.

I look forward to my opponent's arguments in the next round.
Debate Round No. 1


Ok ok fine fine fine,your arguements are so good and I have now officially believe that atheism is illogical thanks for pointing that out you win this arguement and this is so embarrasing,I hope my friends don't know about this ,I am officially a 100& agnostics,you win you win thanks for letting me know all that good points why atheism is illogical appreciated that so much your points are very logical


I'm not sure if my opponent is a troll or not.... but since he has the burden of proof, he needs to provide arguments during the last round, or he has lost the debate.

Debate Round No. 2


Rafique forfeited this round.


I think this is a forfeit? Unfornatute, I was looking forward to a good debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Jjjohn 2 years ago
"but instead that a naturalist reality negates all metaphysical realities, including ethical or moral absolutes."

what evidence can be shown that there are moral absolutes?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by random_noob 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con conceded