Science has proven that are at least 100 trillion Gods.
Debate Rounds (3)
As you can see the sun is seen as a God  and there are lots and lots of stars, also known as Gods. 
I don't get it, why would people doubt the existence of the stars? We couldn't see without them, there wouldn't be any heat.
Definition of God. "4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god." 
Whether or not we agree with Mr. Dawkins, I do think we should be able to at least understand his position, and the position of his debate opponents. I think you may find that this simple explanation is enlightening enough that it resolves the issue immediately without getting too deep into the technical aspects of science and existence and logic. Of course, we can go there if we need to. For now, we'll just talk about denotation of the term 'god' (which I will use interchangeably with 'God' and 'gods' from here on out for simplicity).
The word 'god' has multiple meanings, and they aren't interchangeable. It's what we call a 'polysemic' word. Richard Dawkins is discussing one specific meaning, and you've cited a different meaning that is incompatible.
The definition that you've proposed for 'god' is a perfectly acceptable use of the word, but it's not what is being denoted by Dawkins, or any theist who argues with him. When these people say 'god' - they literally mean one (or more) supreme being(s). They are talking about an actual-in-fact divine being of the universe, which is different than someone or something that is merely worshiped or followed as such.
I hope that resolves the issue and that you can go on to debate Dawkins or theists, as you see fit!
Do you think that Dawkins and theists are debating over whether some people believe in god, or do you think that believing that something is true makes it true?
"Do you think that Dawkins and theists are debating over whether some people believe in god, or do you think that believing that something is true makes it true?"
The latter, its a well known fact that some people believe in God. Therefore, it must be the latter of the two.
Believing that something is true does not make it true. Why? Consider the case where your belief is incorrect. We know that it's possible for beliefs to be incorrect, because a belief is a state of mind about the truth of something.
Assume that believing something is true makes it true. Many people believe that Mexico's Independence Day is Cinco De Mayo (May 5). Their actual Independence Day is September 16. If believing in something makes it true, then Mexico's Independence Day is May 5th (by belief), and it's September 16th (by fact). However, these are different days. We've arrived at a contradiction, so the premise must be rejected. Therefore, believing something is true does not make it true.
Here's another fun one. Assume that believing something is true makes it true. Some people believe that the Apollo program was a conspiracy and the moon landings were faked. Therefore, the Apollo program was a conspiracy and the moon landings were faked. However, other people believe that the Apollo program was not a conspiracy and the moon landings were not faked. Therefore, the Apollo program was both a conspiracy and not a conspiracy, and the moon landings were both faked, and not faked. This is a contradiction, so we have to reject the premise. Therefore, believing something is true does not make it true.
I hope that helps!
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.