The Instigator
RLBaty
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Anti-atheist
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points

Origin Options

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 3 votes the winner is...
Anti-atheist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/30/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,596 times Debate No: 29696
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

RLBaty

Con

Origins Options!

Issue:

- The following statement can be determined
- to be true regardless of whether or not its
- antecedent/condition is true:
-
- IF man had the imaginative power to have
- originated the idea/concept of God,
-
- THEN imagination is one of any number of
- options that should be considered as a
- possible explanation accounting for the
- origin of the idea/concept of God.
-
-- Affirm: ???
--
-- Deny: RLBaty (agent for TSH, Mangani,
-- autodidact, meyer, likespeace, jarhyn,
-- bladerunner060, et al)

I am merely acting as an agent on behalf of the position(s) set forth by my various adversaries here as reflected in various debates, comments and forums as they have sought to deny my simple, almost universally accepted proposition that conditional statements can be determined to be true without regard to whether or not the condition/antecedent is, in fact, true.

I appreciate the feedback regarding the extent to which there are those who present themselves as sincerely doubting that simple, almost universally accepted truth.

To the extent I may not be accurately representing their position, I encourage them to post any necessary clarification in the comments section of this debate.

This debate proposal is designed to allow me to present their position, in the context of an example, in order to see if someone else on the Debate.Org website might present the affirmative in a manner I did not; perhaps in a more convincing manner.

We will see.

For purposes of this debate, the following is proposed in an effort to clarify the issue and avoid missing the issue:

1.

Conditional statements are to be considered true or not true.
Conditional statements are NOT to be considered valid or not valid.

2.

Arguments, not conditional statements, are to be considered valid or not valid.
Arguments, not conditional statements, are NOT to be considered true or not true.

3.

Conditions believed to be true but lacking evidence sufficient to convince some
may be rejected as NOT true for purposes of this debate.

4.

The debate is not about philosophical theories regarding truth functions,
truth tables and the weaker meaning of implication where it may be
proposed that not true conditions imply both true and not true consequents.

5.

This debate involves logical, causal, definitional and decisional implications
based on the actual content of the conditional statement and whether or
not the conditional statement can be determined to be true without
regard to whether the condition is, in fact, known to be true (i.e., IF the
condition were true, THEN what might follow logically, causally,
definitionally, decisionally from the condition).

6.

This debate is not about whether, in fact, a conditional with known or
unknown not true conditions is true, but simply whether or not it is
possible to determine the conditional statement is true IF the
condition is, in fact, not true.

7.

This debate presents an example for analysis and one where the
condition is known to be believed to be true by some while others
deny it is true. For all we know, the condition is NOT true; being
believed by some to be true and believed NOT to be true by others.

8.

Issue:

- The following statement can be determined
- to be true regardless of whether or not its
- antecedent/condition is true:
-
- IF man had the imaginative power to have
- originated the idea/concept of God,
-
- THEN imagination is one of any number of
- options that should be considered as a
- possible explanation accounting for the
- origin of the idea/concept of God.
-
-- Affirm: ???
--
-- Deny: RLBaty (agent for TSH, Mangani,
-- autodidact, meyer, likespeace, jarhyn,
-- bladerunner060, et al)

In further support of the negative I refer you to the negative arguments presented by my adversaries at:

http://www.debate.org...

http://www.debate.org...

http://www.debate.org...

http://www.debate.org...
Anti-atheist

Pro

chirality refutes evolutionary origins

http://creation.com...
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by RLBaty 4 years ago
RLBaty
lit.wakefield,

You noticed! :o)
Posted by lit.wakefield 4 years ago
lit.wakefield
Well this is familiar scenery.
Posted by LatentDebater 4 years ago
LatentDebater
Um...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Mangani 4 years ago
Mangani
RLBatyAnti-atheistTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct point to Pro. Con continues posting similar debates with the sole intent of attracting others to his internet group. This is pitiful.
Vote Placed by LatentDebater 4 years ago
LatentDebater
RLBatyAnti-atheistTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: There was no debate here, RLTBaty is copying form other debates like a coward.
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
RLBatyAnti-atheistTied
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: Pro missed the point of the debate. Con copied the debate from elsewhere. All points previously awarded have been revoked.