The Instigator
ThebigB
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
CrappyDebater
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

The death of god.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 6 votes the winner is...
CrappyDebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/26/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,233 times Debate No: 10966
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (20)
Votes (6)

 

ThebigB

Pro

First to start i offer the idea of nihilism. The idea that life has no meaning.
"A man finds himself, to his great astonishment, suddenly existing, after thousands and thousands of years of non-existence. He lives for a little while and then again comes an equally long period when he must exist no more" From Arthur Schopenhauer.
This is just one of the many examples of the way Schopenhauer's writing can put things in perspective. Like a fickle flam, our existence is small and insignificant in the eyes of the universe. A bit hash, I know, but it's a good way to understand Nihilism. There are many ways to respond to nihilism religion is one of them. Friedrich Nietzsche saw nihilism as a stage that could be overcome. He thought that a god-based value system was, at its foundation, devoid of meaning. He introduced the "death of god" which is the Idea of god. Nietzsche was deeply aware of the implications of the human predicament. One way to respond would be religion. However Nietzche believed that people taking this route would are only clinging to to an idea that has lost force. "Before God! But now this God has died. You higher men, this god was your greatest danger. It is only since he lies in his tomb that you have been resurrected. Only now the great noon comes; only now the higher man becomes lord. God Died, now we want the Overman to live."
Now i present the steps to become overman.
1. Realize that life is meaningless.
2. Enter a "magic circle"
3. Dissovle said circle.
4. Continue bieng in said circle create your self as Art.
5. Appreciate the analogy between The circle and Life. Now make yourself in everday life Art.

What I am saying is that the idea of God is dead in a modern society today. It has no matter anymore. Howver peolle who realise this and continue with regular life become an overman because they blieve that they are still happy and without the need for such things. I believe this is true can you argue? I hope so. I want to enjoy this debate. Thank you my opponent.
CrappyDebater

Con

Hello ThebigB, I accept this debate, and this is my first debate on this forum.
My form of debating sucks, and I debate things in a different way, enjoy.

"First to start i offer the idea of nihilism. The idea that life has no meaning."
That's a great idea, too bad I don't agree with it.
Why not off myself right now? Why continue to live this meaningless life? I pose these questions to hopefully show you that life has a meaning. So tell me, if life as you see it has no meaning, why don't you off yourself right now? Do I want you to commit suicide? No, I believe life has value. Why would life have value if it were meaningless? I am sure you can find a hundred philosophical answers to this question. Therefore, the question stands, does the value of life give meaning to life? I think it does. I can also think of many other examples that give meaning to life. I'll wait for your rebuttals.

"Overman" Another great idea, there are millions of great ideas. Not all great ideas are true.

"What I am saying is that the idea of God is dead in a modern society today. It has no matter anymore."
Wrong. First off you need to define the God you speak of. Second, by the way you type "God" I am going to assume you are referring to the Christian God. Number of Christians in the world - Approx 2.1 BILLION - not counting the other religions with deities. (1)

Now I will acknowledge the topic of this debate. "The death of god."
In this topic you choose to spell it as "god" so in turn I'm assuming? You mean a "god" other than the Christian God?
That would conflict with the way you describe it in your argument. I would like to avoid semantics here... but jeez.

As for my rebuttal....
I believe in God. The Christian God. Why? ****Because I believe in afterlife**** and I believe in Jesus Christ. I live in America and own an iphone... therefore..
As you can see, the "idea of god" which I will change to "idea of God" exists in me. And I live in a "modern society."

(1) http://www.adherents.com...

I thank my opponent for this debate, and look forward to his rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
ThebigB

Pro

"Why not off myself right now? Why continue to live this meaningless life? I pose these questions to hopefully show you that life has a meaning. So tell me, if life as you see it has no meaning, why don't you off yourself right now? Do I want you to commit suicide? No, I believe life has value. Why would life have value if it were meaningless? I am sure you can find a hundred philosophical answers to this question. Therefore, the question stands, does the value of life give meaning to life?"
You wish for my rebuttal? Very well. First the reason behind not killing yourself: Because you have the religion escape, as i said in my argument. People turn to god (and yes i use both God and god i am sorry if i was confusing i mean them both as god for all religions) for the escape from no meaning. An afterlife gives us meaning so that we can go on. However the value of life does not, in itself, give meaning to life. I give you more of my afformentiond writer. Nietzche saw that a god-based system was devoid of meaning. He thought that the idea of an all-powerful, all loving, and all knowing being was not a strong enough view for people in the new western scientific world view. The scientific view tell us that Humans are not so great. We are not the center of the universe. We are one planet revolving around one star that is one of billions of others.
The overman: a being that trancends the accepted value system and goes on to create his own values.
" Let us therefore limit ourselves to the purification of our opinions and valuations and to the creation of our opinions and valuations and to the creation of our own new tables of what is good. We however want to become those we are- human beings who are new, unique, incomparable, who give themselves laws, who created themselves." Nietzsche.
These new humans who "give themselves laws" and "create themselves" are Overmen. The Overman is a being who cares only for everything. He hates none, and loves all, he cares for none, but helps all. The overman is the stage at which man becomes god. All caring and all loving. One who lives simply to live and enjoy the wonders of life.
A reason to live? None. God and an afterlife is not necessary for an Overman. He simply lives with the knowledge that it has no meaning and that he will continue to love despite that fact. I now GRATEFULLY await your response. Thank you for taking me up on this
CrappyDebater

Con

I thank my opponent for his response and I continue with my arguments.

ThebigB, I beg you to read my first post once again. I am not asking the majority of the public the questions. I am asking YOU the questions. You say...

"You wish for my rebuttal? Very well. First the reason behind not killing yourself: Because you have the religion escape, as i said in my argument. People turn to god"

However, in your profile you are listed as Atheist. Therefore, YOU do not have the "religion escape." So my question stands, why don't you off yourself?

If you want to call my reason for MY not killing myself the "religion escape" that's fine. Call it what you want. It does not excuse you from answering the question you being Atheist.

By the way which are you, Absolute Atheist? Deist? Pragmatist? Iconoclast? Etc.

Now, to explain in more depth your religion escape idea, the reason I do not off myself is NOT due to my religion, it is due to common sense and rational thinking on my part. I do not off myself because God says not too, which would be your definition of "religious escape." I however, do not off myself because I believe LIFE HAS MEANING. I believe we are here to learn and experience as much as we can until the time of our death, period. THAT has NOTHING to do with religion. The fact that I believe God says not too only further instills the fact that I shouldn't.

Now, do you want me to debate you or Nietzsche? I understand his idea. I give you an alternate idea. FSM. http://www.venganza.org...
I give you this example because it is in direct opposition to my faith, making it strong. It, is an idea... just like Nietzsche's. Do you also believe it to be true?

"The Overman is a being who cares only for everything. He hates none, and loves all, he cares for" all, and "helps all. The overman is the stage at which man becomes god. All caring and all loving. One who lives simply to live and enjoy the wonders of life."

Sounds like Jesus Christ to me. Are you saying your as much as Jesus Christ? I wish I could be the same, I certainly strive to.

"A reason to live? None. God and an afterlife is not necessary for an Overman. He simply lives with the knowledge that it has no meaning and that he will continue to love despite that fact."
I wish the best of love and luck to Overmans, and Atheists in the search for truth.

My original argument still stands, and I await your response.
Debate Round No. 2
ThebigB

Pro

However, in your profile you are listed as Atheist. Therefore, YOU do not have the "religion escape." So my question stands, why don't you off yourself?"
It does not say Atheist. Or at least its not supposed to. I am agnostic, I do not have religion nor do I hate others who do.
Now to return your arguments.
1. Why do I continue to live? Simple. Because I enjoy life, I want to see it all and continue on my path of happiness until I die.
You say that you continue to live because you love life and living. This is what I have been saying. The Overman is that. He knows life has no meaning but continues to live.
2. As for who you are debating that would be me. My evidence and arguments simply come from Nietzsche.

You also state that because God says not to kill yourself you do not. This only furthers my argument that you, and others, take religion as their reason to live. You may live because you value life, which makes you like an Overman, however you also live because God says you should.
As I said earlier it is the idea of god. An all knowing, loving, and omnipotent being. You dropped this argument so I will return it. In a new scientific world of discovery and the knowledge that we are a pimple on the back of the universes smallest amoeba compared to the Universe as a whole. We are nothing special at all. That is what leads to my nihilism argument. When you realize this and that you have nothing to live for but continue living you become the Overman.

Also when you enter a "Magic Circle." The game of golf has this. People play by the rules and you are in the "Circle" when you stop playing by the rules you leave the "magic circle". The "magic circle" is another escape to the meaninglessness of life. When you play a game it gives meaning by trying to win. When you leave the circle you realize that nothing has really changed. However you continue playing making you an Overman.

Now to the stages I said earlier:
1. Realize that life has no meaning. I believe you are almost here.
2. Enter a games "magic circle"
3. Dissolve said "circle"
4. Play the game anyway. This is where I am at.
5. Appreciate the analogy between the two and create yourself as a work of art greatness of life.
These steps show what make an Overman. If you do not see yourself at 1. then you are most likely at the god belief faze where life is giving meaning in DEATH. In other words you must die to achieve any hope of meaning for your life. Until then Living has no meaning.

I eagerly await your response.
CrappyDebater

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.
As listed in comments, I apologized for thinking I saw ThebigB as Atheist, rather than Agnostic.
This however does nothing to change my argument.

I would like to start this final round with that, I noticed in your profile under beliefs you list, "I really careless. I am not a religious man nor do i see a real point to it."
I respect your opinion but that begs the question as to why you would start such a religious debate.
Anyway..
You misunderstood my original statement. "I do not off myself because God says not too." This can be read two ways, I should have clarified. Let me rephrase it to, the reason I do not off myself has nothing to do with God not wanting me too." Make sense now? This crushes the religious escape.

"we are a pimple on the back of the universes smallest amoeba compared to the Universe as a whole. We are nothing special at all"
Your putting the universe into perspective.. good! I like that. Just because we are not in the center of the Milky Way, does not mean we are not at the direct center of the Universe. Think of the entire universe as the size of a dinner plate, I bet we are at the center. How's that for a perspective? The fact that we are minuscule in size compared to the size of the universe is irrelevant. Compared to a human, an atom is minuscule.... does that make it any less important? No.

Your stages of the magic circle are respectively bogus. I call it Cheerleader Syndrome. Ignorance is bliss. Why?
I too was at the stage of "Play the game anyway" going through life as such is silly. What knocked some sense into me is the worldwide debate of evolution. Evolution requires its own debate, but for the sake of this argument, I don't believe in Macro Evolution insofar as that we came from a common ancestor of apes. This leads me to believe in special creation. I believe in Jesus Christ. Jesus tells us to follow himself in life. THAT is life's meaning, to strive to be perfect like him. I believe humans are sinners. We ALL have bad thoughts, we have all lied, cheated, stolen. I believe we require redemption.

And I close with this quote...

[People say] "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the devil of Hell. You must take your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon, or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.
—From Mere Christianity , C. S. Lewis (1898–1963), Professor of Medieval and Renaissance English Literature, Cambridge University, England

I appreciate you taking the time to have this debate with me, being the first debate for both of us, and I am more than happy to continue speaking about this with you.

Please vote CON, thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Who killed God, MEH!!!

Thus spoke Zetsubou!!:A Book for All and None
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Who killed God, MEH!!!

Thus spoke Zetsubou!!:A Book for All and None
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Who killed God, MEH!!!

Thus spoke Zetsubou!!:A Book for All and None
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Who killed God, MEH!!!

Thus spoke Zetsubou!!:A Book for All and None
Posted by mattrodstrom 7 years ago
mattrodstrom
I'm taking schaupenhauer nietzsche and Plato etc in a Phil. of Art class now.

I think it's pretty cool how their valuation of Art all relies on their understanding of Metaphysics.

That said Zhuangzi has a 'metaphysically' similar but, superior view on pretty much everything :)

though on how to live your life he's rather similar to Nietzsche in that he thinks you should act only through embracing your nature.

saying something like: "the sage does not act, but nothing is left undone"

Nietzsche I guess (I haven't really read too much of him yet) says understand and accept your nature, but act too. which is kind of the same thing.
Posted by infam0us 7 years ago
infam0us
OMG LOLOLOL kenyon
Posted by ThebigB 7 years ago
ThebigB
1. Yes agnostic. Not aatheist. There is a difference.
2. What's with the definition? I know what you meant by blotched and I am pretty sure everyone else does to.
3. I still think i did not blotch it that bad.
Posted by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
1. The agnostic equivalent, then.
2. Blotched -- verb (used with object): to mark with blotches; blot, spot, or blur. "The floor of the forest was blotched with cool, dark moss." (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
Posted by ThebigB 7 years ago
ThebigB
1. I am not athiest.
2. I do not believe I blotched it that bad.
Posted by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
It's not a literal death...he's basically lifting an argument from Nietzsche's "Parable of the Madman," but doesn't understand it and botches it badly. What Nietzsche was saying is that we REALIZE now that God is dead, and what follows is a loss of meaning.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Illumination 7 years ago
Illumination
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Grape 7 years ago
Grape
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by ThebigB 7 years ago
ThebigB
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by InquireTruth 7 years ago
InquireTruth
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by infam0us 7 years ago
infam0us
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
ThebigBCrappyDebaterTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15