The Instigator
deputy
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
CAPLlock
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The Kalam Cosmological Argument can be used to prove that a personal god/s exist/s.

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 5 votes the winner is...
deputy
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/2/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 876 times Debate No: 19640
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (5)

 

deputy

Con

I will present definitions in my first argument; however, I will make no arguments of my own here.. My opponent accepts the burden of proof upon accepting this debate.

Definitions:
The Kalam Cosmological Argument: the argument consisting of 2 premises and 1 conclusion which are:
1. Anything that begins to exist must have a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore the universe has a cause.

personal god/s - one or more beings, theistic or deistic, who caused the universe to come into being.

the universe: the space-time fabric which contains everything we know including all galaxies, stars, planets, lifeforms, etc.

My opponent must both prove the premises of the Kalam argument and prove that the premises support the conclusion. My opponent must then use the kalam argument to prove the existence of a personal god or gods over a naturalistic cause.
CAPLlock

Pro

I concur.
Debate Round No. 1
deputy

Con

deputy forfeited this round.
CAPLlock

Pro

CAPLlock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
deputy

Con

deputy forfeited this round.
CAPLlock

Pro

CAPLlock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
deputy

Con

deputy forfeited this round.
CAPLlock

Pro

CAPLlock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
deputy

Con

deputy forfeited this round.
CAPLlock

Pro

CAPLlock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
The burden of proof is on whoever hold the argument to be true. The burden of rejoiner is on whoever holds it to be false. The difference is, if neither is satisfied, the rejoiner wins.

People seem to think the 'burden of proof' is a massive disadvantage. It simply isn't. It only requires you to present an argument. Seeing as the debate is on a specific argument, the burden of proof is satisfied once PRO states the KCA. Seeing as CON gave what the argument is, one can simply copy and paste it in word-for-word and burden of proof is satisfied.
Posted by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
Most voters will not consent to your fallacious burden of proof shift.

The minority and contrary oppinion within the authorities, typically bears the burden of proof.
Posted by deputy 5 years ago
deputy
Well of course I will attempt to show how it's not sound, however it is still up to pro to prove the argument is sound and to use it to prove God's existence
Posted by popculturepooka 5 years ago
popculturepooka
No. You should accept (part of) the burden proof in showing how it's not sound and the contender should have to show how it is. I don't see why the burden should be all on Pro.
Posted by deputy 5 years ago
deputy
In the case of the big bang the simple proof for the premises would be that enormous scientific proof of the big bang suggests that the universe had a beginning. Pro accepts burden of proof because pro would be attempting to prove the positive claim that God exists using the kalam cosmological argument.
Posted by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
Why would you expect Pro to accept the Burden of Proof for an Axiom that is obvious and with zero contrary proof?

The Axiom everything has a beginning is proven out be every known physical thing in the universe.

The burden of proof is on the Con to offer proof against the Axiom.

The second is that the prevailing and near certain theory of the Big Bang asserts that the universe had a beginning.

Again the Burden of Proof is on Con to go against the prevailing scientific model.

Additionally, the cosmological argument is one step in the assertion of a maximally supreme being.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
deputyCAPLlockTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro accepted the debate, including Con's terms of him accepting the BoP. Since Pro never provided an argument, he failed to uphold his burden and thus loses on arguments automatically. Conduct tied for forfeits on both sides.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
deputyCAPLlockTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: CON provided what most would say is part of the argument, but the conclusion does not prove deities - their mention is not in the syllogism. PRO simply agreed with the argument. Therefore, CON wins, as BOP is not satisfied.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
deputyCAPLlockTied
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: Well, this again proves my point that debaters should learn to put other activities aside if they want to complete a debate....
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
deputyCAPLlockTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: concede
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
deputyCAPLlockTied
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: I CANT DECIDE!!!!