Is atheism illogical
Debate Rounds (3)
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.
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.
Rafique forfeited this round.
I think this is a forfeit? Unfornatute, I was looking forward to a good debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by random_noob 10 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||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Con conceded
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.