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

Objective Belief

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: 11/29/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 540 times Debate No: 66002
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




I think belief is subjective. It's an opinion. Only when it is proven does it become knowledge. The two definitions of the word 'belief' in the Oxford English dictionary state that belief is:

1. An acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.
2. (belief in) Trust, faith, or confidence in (someone or something).

The first definition objectifies belief and is surely, in every way, impossible.


First of all i'm new to this whole system so sorry if i cant use this properly.
If you're referring to religion in this then belief is technically not an opinion. It actually always bothered me when people told me that "this is what you believe and this is what i believe" if you 'believe in a religion that means that you are low in confidence and faith. I as a proud religious man , do not believe, i know . For me it is not my opinion my faith in god is high so therefore i know. If someone tells me that i 'have beliefs' i'm guessing hes an atheist.Because he doesn't "believe". Now i do agree with you that the proper definition of believe is what you wrote. But however when you enter religion words have complete different meanings. E.G. English people say that a Muslims mandatory worship is praying. But we don't actually pray sometimes we use the closest word to the actual meaning. That's what happened in the word belief, it doesn't fully fit the actual meaning of the word but its the closest thing to relate it to and i pass it to you
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for agreeing to debate with me and welcome.

I want to begin by saying that I'm not here to debate the existence of God. I assume that what you believe makes you happy and that's great. It's not my intention to refute that and I will therefore write my arguments in this tone throughout. With this in mind, I'd like to focus on the fourth and fifth sentences in your argument if I may:

"I as a proud religious man, do not believe, I know. For me it is not my opinion my faith in god is high so therefore I know."

I wasn't necessarily referring to religion in my description but for the purpose of this debate I don't mind including it. As you are challenging me, would you agree that what you speak about here is objective belief? You believe to such an extent that you know?

In our every day lives we use faith, as per the second definition. It's necessary because we draw on our experiences in order to make decisions, often in our subconscious. This faith/trust/confidence is subjective because most of the time we lack complete evidence. But that's fine because we gauge likelihood as best we can and indeed we can get it right or wrong. In order to make fewer mistakes we try to narrow the gap between opinions and knowledge. The key to this of course, is evidence.

To claim that God exists is an extraordinary claim. Like I said, I'm not debating truths here. But an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence does it not? Sure, it could be true, just as it could also no be true. Only when it is proven is such a claim considered to be knowledge. Not before. I therefore hold that even if God exists, you do not know because you have no way of knowing, unless you can present evidence and prove it first. Until this time, you believe, you have subjective belief.


Thank you for the clarification. But God can still be used as an example. Adding on to that if i believe that but i tell it to someone who does not believe what i do . To him it is not proven. For example the theory of evolution from the perspective of a man/woman it is proven. but to me it is not. this isn't the time to say why it is not. But the oxford definition of knowledge is proven info. thats what you said right? it might have been proven to some people but not to others. So to some people it is belief but to others it is not real. Im so sorry i cant speak well. Its hard to get the meassage through my head
Debate Round No. 2


Sure, let's carry on using God as an example. I think if you tell a non-believer that you believe something, what can they really say back? They can disagree with you. So what if they do? They can argue with you, but again, so what? And there's certainly no harm in debating it. Both sides of the argument will have one thing in common and that is subjectivity. Just like a theory. It's an opinion by its very nature. People are entitled to their opinions. However, the quality of an argument for a proposition improves when evidence is brought to the table.

One thing I disagree with is something being true for one person but not true for someone else. That's clearly illogical. People are not entitled to their own facts because then they could use those facts to justify whatever they wanted. That's not how it works and I think a mindset like that is incredibly dangerous.

It is for this reason that a belief (even if it is true) is subjective until it is proven, then it is knowledge.


AmeenDebateLord forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Soul.Purge 2 years ago
Ok so I can see that this is getting very definitional. In my opinion, knowledge means that information is proven and therefore one accepts it as true. Belief means that information is not proven, yet one still accepts it as true (basically hope/guessing)

From this, belief is subjective, knowledge is not. Lets see result of this debate and how it fits with my personal opinion.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
The Oxford Concise English Dictionary, gives two distinct meanings for faith:
"1) complete trust or confidence, and 2) strong belief in a religion based on spiritual conviction rather than proof." A scientist's "faith" is built on experimental proof. The two meanings of the word "faith," therefore, are not only different, they are exact opposites.
When someone claims to have supernatural knowledge, or the ability to gain knowledge in a way that you are unable to, their claims cannot be considered valid.
Reason is objective and faith which is the opposite of reason is subjective.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF