The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

The existence of information is evidence for a Creator.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 556 times Debate No: 73725
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)




Information. What is it? It has it's own existence, independent of matter and energy. It is non material in nature. It is my belief that a material universe is not capable of creating something that is non material. Therefore it must have originated from outside of our material universe. In other words, God did it.

Three rounds. Opening argument. Rebuttals. Closing argument. Seven point voting.

I will have the burden of proof, so my opponent will go first

Good luck to my opponent. I'm looking forward to this.
Debate Round No. 1


Well. Looks like we have someone who things he's funny. Since my opponent refuses to present any arguments, I'm declaring this a forfeit. Please report this POS. It's obvious he dosn't belong here.


I am not at liberty to make arguments in this debate since Pro carries the full BoP.

Pro's personally belief that information cannot be produced by the material universe at best only proves that either information cannot be produced, or is produced non-materially.

What has any of this got to do with God?

Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

1. Assume Pro's Belief
Even if we assume Pro's belief that the material cannot produce information, it doesn't follow the universe cannot since Pro hasn't shown that the universe is wholly material. Which given his undefined terms leaves open a plethora of options which do not require violating naturalism.

Even if we assume materialism is false, there still is dualism/idealism/solipsism, etc etc. which are not material based and do not mandate or even evidence God.

2. Information
Where is Pro's evidence that information cannot be produced by material origins? Each time I pull the trigger on my camera, new digital information is created on the memory card based on it's physical interactions with nature. Thus - information is created just fine physically. I suspect Pro has some abstract weird definition of "information" he is adhering to - which he should define if he does.

3. God
How is God not material? Is it "not material" by definition? If he is "not material" by definition, then I posit a counter hypothesis called a "ChinaChuk" - which is a form of magic computer which is defined as being "not material". Thus - information is just as much evidence for this "ChinaChuk" as it is God. Obviously anyone could imagine a zillion random things which are "not material" and all would be equally evidenced by information. God just comes out of nowhere as an explanation - seems to be an argument from ignorance at it's core.


I am hungry now - Chinese sounds good.
Debate Round No. 2


You said that you were not at liberty to debate this. then why did you accept the debate? Why did you not let someone else accept it? Once again, I declare a forfeit, since you missed the first round, and also accepted without the intention of debating me.

But to answer one of your questions, when I mentioned information, I was referring to natural information, such as that contained in DNA. This is complex, specified information. It is a carrier of meaning. It is read and acted upon by the thousands of biological micromachines in the cell. This information could not have created itself through a naturalistic process. For example, scientists have recently created a synthetic lifeform. Sounds pretty amazing, right. But in order to accomplish this amazing feat, the scientists had to use existing life, not once. Not twice. But three times! Even with all of our knowledge and technology, we cannot create life without using life. This is proof that it could not happen by naturalistic processes.


Pro concedes this debate.

Also Pro strawmans me, I said I am not at liberty to *provide arguments*. Since Pro has the burden here.

However, Pro has left all my arguments unaddressed.

Further he abandons his original argument, and now leans heavily on the unproven assertion that naturalism cannot generate information - ignoring that we already have processes that produce it (e.g. camera example). He also refuted himself when he says humans have created life, since this would be a generation of new information from materialistic processes, true that pre-existing information was present, but this alone refutes the notion that a non-material origin of information is required, since material origins of new information are already known.

Furthermore, even if naturalism is false, that doesn't prove God, since there are millions of atheistic ontologies which do not require naturalism to be true (such as what I gave last round).
Debate Round No. 3


As I already mentioned, in the comments section, this is my first debate. It was my intention to argue that a naturalistic origin of life was impossible, since information is immaterial, and that nature is incapable of creating complex, specified Information, which is inmaterial, on its own. My apologies for not making that clear. If my opponent is open to the idea, I'll create another debate to debate just that.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
information is non sense

sense=physical experience

machine as i see it, is mostly a copy of nature on a lower level, like an airplane is a mechanical copy of a bird or a camera is a mechanical copy of an eye
Posted by B0HICA 1 year ago
That made absolutely no sense.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
machine is a copy of nature and supernature is an extension of nature, exceeds nature, like superman
Posted by B0HICA 1 year ago
Human's can create information. You are correct. But humans are also intelligent. Nature is not. This is why the only explaination for the origin of life is a intelligent Creator.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
information is the opposite of matter, matter is true, matter is something, matter is physical
Posted by MultiCulturalism 1 year ago
Humans can create that type of information, and humans are part of the natural world, this argument is nonsense - you would have to argue humans are supernatural to cling onto that ridiculous belief.
Posted by B0HICA 1 year ago
I'm referring to information in the natural world, such as that contained in DNA. I should have made that clear. This is my first debate, btw. I should have clearer. My argument is that DNA contains meaningful information. Such information cannot be created by a naturalistic process.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
information is 0 percent of the light in my personal physical experience
Posted by atheismdebater 1 year ago
What do you mean by information? Most information is either a) directly related to the chemical a d physical processes that occurs in the universe, or b) human interpretations of chemical and physical recations of the material universe. ovkham's razor comes into affect here.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Chaosism 1 year ago
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: Pro's arguments were not well supported and Pro failed to meet the Burden of Proof for his claim. Conduct to Pro because he could have explained his refusal to provide arguments in Round #1 rather than simply saying "Nah".