The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
chewster911
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

atheism is theism, and science is a religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
chewster911
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 673 times Debate No: 65440
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

vi_spex

Pro

says it right in the name, a(theism)=dis(belief)=belief=theism

atheism is disbelief, to believe god is false, the no position to the theistic claim where as the theistic position is yes and agnostic(non belief) is I accept i don't know
chewster911

Con

First of all,disbelief =/= belief. The prefix "dis" comes from the Latin and it means "apart" , "away" , "asunder" [1]. So "disbelief" means "apart from belief,apart from believing in a supernatural being".

Pro incorrectly states that disbelief means "to believe god is false". This is not a true definition when it comes to atheism. Disbelief means "inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real (in this case god)." It doesn't mean "a belief that something is false (in this case god)". [2] So atheism is not a belief as we concluded solely on definitions.

I would also love to see Pro's argument (or possibly another false definition) of why he/she thinks science is a religion.

Definition for science: "knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation." [3]

Definition for religion: "An organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods" [4]

So to conclude:

1.Belief =/= disbelief;
2.Atheism is a disbelief in a god/gods,not a belief that god is false.
3.Science is based on experimentation and evidence, while religion is based on belief and assumptions that have no evidence to back them up. So science =/= religion

Pro did not do any research on the definitions. With false definitions he could make as many assumptions as he/she wants. Also,this debate is 5 rounds long. That is to long for this kind of "debate".

Sources:

http://dictionary.reference.com...- [1]
https://www.google.rs... [2]
http://www.merriam-webster.com... [3]
http://www.merriam-webster.com... [4]
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

a part, a way, as under :)

god=information, all that is false, anywhere beyond my personal physical experience of now, future, imagination, the reflection of nothing while my personal physical experience of now is everything

you can not disbelieve a claim without belief.. and that sentence should end any doubt you have, that disBELIEF, is not belief.. because disbelief is belief, negative position on the claim where as theism is the positive, and the balancing point is acceptance I don't know, as that is true for anyone on all god claims.

belief=be lie=doubt=false
I don't know=I have to imagine it=true
know=physical experience of now=true

belief is doubt, so as a balance of doubting a god is false, I must believe god is true

the bigger point is, I don't even think they are any atheists, I have never met one, and I have had many debates about this, but belief in science, is also theism, not atheism, therefore most people are theists thinking they are atheists where as their belief in science negates belief in god and thus they can have non belief, as they have another religion

am I holding a rock in my hand? you have to imagine It
theist=yes
atheist=no
agnostic=I don't know
chewster911

Con

So much wrongness in your arguments, Pro.

Playing with words will get you nowhere,as i said previously.

None of the things you said is true. The word "lie" does not come from "belief".
I suggest you to stop playing with words and go learn about real definitions of those words. Using that game of yours i can claim anything i want. For example: rebuttal means kicking in the butt,because it contains the word "butt" in it. So you either did not study grammar, or you are desperately searching for a way to prove that atheism is belief,science is religion and other stuff like that.

"but belief in science, is also theism, not atheism, therefore most people are theists thinking they are atheists where as their belief in science negates belief in god and thus they can have non belief, as they have another religion"

Theism: Belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.

Is science a creator,is science a god? Well...i have to admit that science is pretty amazing,i love it,but it is not a god. And no one ever claimed that "science is atheism". Science is irrelevant to atheism or theism,so you fail Pro.

Now stop playing word games and IF you have another way to prove your points,then do it. I already know the answer: No
You will lose the debate using word games,but you don't have nothing else to lash on to,so i guess you lost the debate.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

you can not be a lie without beliefs, as lies are information

it is in the name so one overlooks it, and im not arguing that theism is atheism because it says it in the name.. that is just a way of seeing the obvious when you know what religion is

god=Information

the universe is imaginary, god, a world creator if believed.
unless your definition of universe is personal physical experience of now, how do you know a universe is true?

belief in science creates my whirl, and the world is for the whirled. facts are also god claims

an "atheist" will argue from the standpoint of science, and im not claiming this as an absolute.. I said in the debates I have had I have never met an actual atheist, only theists to science

only you play with words like, science is amazing, but its not a "god". tell me what a god is then if you know
chewster911

Con

Information: what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things.
god=/= information. You are quite ignorant. I explained why you are wrong on those points so i will not even try to do that again,because you will just again repeat your word games.

"only you play with words like, science is amazing, but its not a "god". tell me what a god is then if you know"

So you believe that science is a god? God is a supernatural being as i said,and science is not supernatural,let alone "being".
I was not playing with words,i was just stating that science is amazing,i don't know how is that a word game?!

Pro,if you have any dignity left,you will forfeit. Because you are making a fool out of yourself.
Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

I have no beliefs, I know my experience of now

information=opposite of matter, false and truth, while matter is true

supernature=god=superman=unicorns=nothing

just answer me this, am I holding a rock in my hand? you have to imagine it
chewster911

Con

Information is false? Your information is false,mine isn't. I don't know how can you describe a term like "information" as false as it cannot be unfalsifiable or falsifiable. The same goes for matter.

"just answer me this, am I holding a rock in my hand? you have to imagine it"

First of all this analogy is completely different from the standard "god" beliefs. That's because you holding a rock is completely possible and you are not braking any physical laws. The same cannot be said for "god" as it is supernatural and cannot be explained under our physical laws,neither by science or logic.
Second of all,that analogy is not helping you at all.

You still did not provide valid arguments for your claims. Hard,ain't it?
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

0=information=imagination and memory=future and past=false and truth=nothing

like 0 bananas

1=matter=physical experience=now=true=something

opposites, absolutes

so the rock I am holding in my hand is real? since it doesn't violate the natural laws?

anything I imagine is supernatural, the rock is supernatural, as its not real
chewster911

Con

**Facepalm**. I have nothing else to say...let the voters decide.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by gherkin 2 years ago
gherkin
You clearly haven't expanded your vocabulary. the An and A root word means without (after looking into it a little more I confirmed the definition) that's why there is an A in atheism. The whole thing means without religion. And don't provide me with some stupid response that makes no sense. You know I'm right just accept it and stop trying to sound cool. 26 year-old my a**, you sound like a 12 year old with the way you handle your debates.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
A=all that can possibly be experienced, top middle and botm
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
why would I take about sense
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
god is non sense
Posted by gherkin 2 years ago
gherkin
I just love how you have to correct everyone on everything. Anyway this whole debate makes no sense. religion is the total loyalty towards a diety. In science you dont praise anything you simply try a figure out how it happened. And another thing the A in atheism means not, guess what you get when you put that together. You get not theistic. Learn your damn words.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
mysteries to a complicated mind

sense=physical experience of now
Posted by gherkin 2 years ago
gherkin
all of your debates you make make no sense. And votes dont determine my world what the hell are you even talking about at this point.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
assertions and votes determine your world
Posted by gherkin 2 years ago
gherkin
science cannot be a religion since it doesn't involve a higher being. its the belief in evolution. really what made you even think science was a religion.
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
Spex, send me a challenge for this debate. I may be interested in it.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by NoMagic 2 years ago
NoMagic
vi_spexchewster911Tied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's "arguments" consist of unsupported assertions and unjustified redefinitions. These aren't arguments. Debating vi spex is a waste of time.
Vote Placed by Philosophybro 2 years ago
Philosophybro
vi_spexchewster911Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: vi_Spex has bad conduct because of derailment of the debate into I dont know what. Bad capitalization for spex. Bad argument that misunderstands language too. Chewster properly clears up what the words mean but spex goes off on a rant about who knows what that has nothing to do with the debate....