The Instigator
inaudita
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Burningsnow
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

The existence of a god cannot be proven or disproven (quotation battle)

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 4 votes the winner is...
Burningsnow
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/24/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 910 times Debate No: 59498
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

inaudita

Pro

After acceptance in round one individuals will only be able to make arguments through direct quotation of individuals. Their is to be no use of an individuals own words in the following rounds unless it is to provide a source for the individuals quotation. Their is to be a maximum of 3 quotations within a round.

Deviation from these rules or failure to post a proper source from a quotation is to forfeit the debate.
Burningsnow

Con

"Yes I will debate you"
Debate Round No. 1
inaudita

Pro

On Poets
"Since I have come to know he body better," Zarathustra said to one of his disciples, "the spirit is to me only quasi-spirit; and all that is 'permanent' is also more parable."

"I have heard you say that once before," the disciple replied; "and at that time you added, 'But the poets lie too much.' Why did you say that the poets lie too much?"
"Why?" said Zarathustra. "You ask, why? I am not one of those whom one may ask about their why. Is my experience but of yesterday? It was long ago that I experienced the reasons for my opinions. Would I not have to be a barrel of memory if I wanted to carry my reasons around with me? It is already too much for me to remember my own opinions; and many a bird flies away. And now and then I also find a stray in my dovecot that is strange to me and trembles when I place my hand on it. But what was it Zarathustra once said to you? That the poets lie too much? But Zarathustra too is a poet. Do you now believe he spoke the truth here? Why do you believe that?"
The disciple answered, "I believe in Zarathustra." But Zarathustra shook his head and smiled.
"Faith does not make me blessed," he said, "especially not faith in me. But suppose somebody said in all seriousness, the poets lie too much: he would be right; e do lie too much. We also know too little and we are bad learners; so we simply have to lie. And who among us poets has not adultered his wine? Many a poisonous hodgepodge has been contrived in our cellars; much that s indescribable was accomplished there. And because we know so little, the poor in spirit please us heartily, particularly when they are young females. And we are covetous even of those things which the old females tell eah other in the evening. That is what we call the Eternal-Feminine in us. And, as if there were a special secret access to knowledge, buried for those who learn something, we believe in the people and their 'wisdom.'
"This, however, all poets believe: that whoever pricks up his ears as he lies in the grass or on lonely sloped will find out something about those things that are between heaven and earth. And when they feel tender sentiments stirring, the poets always fancy that nature herself is in love with them; and that the is creeping to their ears to tell them secrets and amorous flatteries; and one of this they brag and boast before all mortals.
"Alas, there are so many things between heaven and earth of which only the poets have dreames.
"And especially above the heavans: for all gods are poets' parables, poets' prevarications. Verily, it always lifts us higher--specificaly, to the relm of the clouds: upon these we plce motley bastards and call them gods and overmen. For they are just light enough for these chairs--all gods and overmen. Ah, how weary I am of all the imperfection which must at all costs become event! Ah, how weary I am of poets!"
When Zarathustrs spoke thus, his disciple was angry wih him, but he remained silent. And Zarathustra too remained silent; and his eye had turned inward as if he were gazing into vast distances. At last he sighed and drew a deap breath.
"I am of today and before," he said then, "but there is something in me that is of tomorrow and the day after tomorrow and the day after tomorrow and time to come. I have grown weary of the poets, the old and the new: superficial they all seem to me, and shallow seas. Their thoughts have not penetrated deeply enough; therefore their feeelings did not touvh bottom.
"Some lust and some boredom: that has so far been their best reflection. All their harp jingling is to me the breathing and flitting of ghosts; what have they ever known of the fervor of tones?
"Nor are they clean enough for me: they all muddy their waters to make them appear deep. And they like to pose as reconcilers: but mediators and mixers they remain for me, and half-and-half and unclean.
"Also, I cast my net into their seas and wanted to catch good fish; but I always pulled up the head of some old god. Thus the sea gave him who was hungry a stone. And they themselves may well have come from the sea. Certainly, pearls are found in them: they are that much more siliar to hard shellfish. And instead of a soul I oten found salted slime in them.
"From the sea they learned even its vanity: is not the sea the peacock of peacocks? Even before the ugliest buffalo it still spreads out its tail, and never wearies of its lace fan of silver and silk. Sulky, the buffalo stares back, close to the sand in his soul, closer still to the thicket, closest of all to the swamp. What are beauty and sea and peacock's finery to him? This parable I offer the poets. Verily, their spirit itself is the peacock of peacocks and a sea of vanity! THe spirit of the poet craves spectators--even if only buffaloes.
"But I have grown weary of the spirit; and I forsee that it will grow weary of itself. I have alreadt seen the poets changed, with their glances turned back on themselves. I saw ascetics of the spirit apporach; they grew out of the poets."
Thus Spake Zarathustra

From Thus Spoke Zarathustra: Second Part
p.238 The Portable Nietzsch 1954 edition
Burningsnow

Con

"It is very unnerving to be proven wrong, particularly when you are really right and the person who is really wrong is proving you wrong and proving himself, wrongly, right", in the blank book written by Lemony Snicket

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion", spoke by Carl sagan.

"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and Christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd",spoke by Sam Harris.
Debate Round No. 2
inaudita

Pro

"In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point." - Friederich Nietzsche

"Tell me there is a God in the serene heavens that will damn his children for the expression of an honest belief! More men have died in their sins, judged by your orthodox creeds, than there are leaves in all the forests in the wide world ten thousand times over. Tell me these men are in Hell; that these men are in torment; that these children are in eternal pain, and that they are to be punished forever and forever! I denounce this doctrine as the most infamous of lies." - Robert G. Ingersoll

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God? - Epicurus
Burningsnow

Con

"For those who believe in God, most of the big questions are answered. But for those of us who can't readily accept the God formula, the big answers don't remain stone-written. We adjust to new conditions and discoveries. We are pliable. Love need not be a command nor faith a dictum. I am my own god. We are here to unlearn the teachings of the church, state, and our educational system. We are here to drink beer. We are here to kill war. We are here to laugh at the odds and live our lives so well that Death will tremble to take us." By Charles Bukowski

"Yes, reason has been a part of organized religion, ever since two nudists took dietary advice from a talking snake." from Jon Stewart.

"Agnostics are just atheists without balls." "Stephen Colbert
Debate Round No. 3
inaudita

Pro

"Who is more humble? The scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever the universe has to teach us, or somebody who says everything in this book must be considered the literal truth and never mind the fallibility of all the human beings involved?"
-Carl Sagan
"As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one can prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think that I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because, when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods."
-Bertrand Russell
"I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure " that is all that agnosticism means."
-Clarence Darrow
Burningsnow

Con

"An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An atheist believes that deed must be done instead of prayer said. An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanished, war eliminated"

- Madalyn O Hair

"Believe nothing, No matter where you read it, Or who has said it, Not even if I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own common sense"

- Buhda.

"Most people cannot bear sitting in church for an hour on a Sunday. How are they supposed to live somewhere very similar to it for an eternity?

– Mark Twain

Debate Round No. 4
inaudita

Pro

The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic.
-Charles Darwin

Rather than say he's an atheist, a friend of mine says, 'I'm a tooth fairy agnostic,' meaning he can't disprove God but thinks God is about as likely as the tooth fairy.
-Richard Dawkins

Agnosticism simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that for which he has no grounds for professing to believe.
-Thomas H. Huxley
Burningsnow

Con

Burningsnow forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Burningsnow 3 years ago
Burningsnow
Vote for me
Posted by ArcTImes 3 years ago
ArcTImes
Then there is no explanation. Good to know.
Posted by JeanneTheGreat 3 years ago
JeanneTheGreat
To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.
Posted by evangambit 3 years ago
evangambit
What is the point of an argument without original words? This seems to be a fairly meaningless restriction. I suppose it necessitates both sides be well read on the issue, but it would seem that truth is not the priority here.

I'm interested in how Pro will prove that a god cannot be proven with a reasonable definition of "proven" (e.g. insofar as any knowledge of the universe can be proven).
Posted by AlexanderOc 3 years ago
AlexanderOc
Where's Envisage? He's running a little late.
Posted by ArcTImes 3 years ago
ArcTImes
That sounds interesting. Not so sure I can't find good quotes for the Con's position tho.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
inauditaBurningsnowTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct due to missed round. S&G for pro being unable to pick one quotation style (I suggest double quotation marks) and stick to it. Stephen Colbert quotes are pretty reliably going to be a strong point in any debate, plus con actually got his point across rather than trying walls of text.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 3 years ago
johnlubba
inauditaBurningsnowTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I liked Con's quotes better although he forfeited a round so conduct goes to Pro.
Vote Placed by Vexorator 3 years ago
Vexorator
inauditaBurningsnowTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side provide any convincing quotes/arguments. One key point missing that Pro could have made was that the idea of a god is an unfalsifiable hypothesis, which would prove that a god cannot be proven nor disproven.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
inauditaBurningsnowTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for the forfeit. As to arguments, I couldn't really decide--neither side really supported a case through the use of quotatiosn, so I suppose I *could* just award points based on my subjective preference on the quotations, but given that Pro had a whole "extra round" thanks to Con's forfeit, he probably would win on that. Since I'm not confident on that as a judging criteria for this one, and since Pro already got the conduct point anyway, I figured I'd just null the arguments. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.