belief=disbelief of knowledge
Debate Rounds (3)
theism and atheism, brightness and shadow
In this debate I will demonstrate:
1) Why Belief entails a belief in some certain semantic facts (knowledge)
2) Why belief does not necessitate a disbelief of known facts
3) Why the proposition is stupid
Pro has burden of Proof, I await his opening case.
knowledge is the opposite of belief, facts are unchanging or they are not knowledge or facts, but believed to be
if you believe a dragon caused all the destruction in the city, you will have to disbelieve any story about a hurricane doing any damage, unless the dragon caused a hurricane or something...
I have no BoP let me make that abundantly clear.
Knowledge is not the opposition of belief, contrary to what Pro claims.
Merriam Webster defines knowledge as:
There are two broad categories which describe knowledge as defined by the first definition.
A posteriori is knowledge gained through experience or observation. 'The sky is blue,' 'all men are mortal,' are both examples
A priori conversely is deduced knowledge:
>'All men are mortal'
>'Socrates is a man'
>Socrates is a mortal.
Therefore, Pro's belief on what knowledge is, is wrong.
Belief is not the opposite of knowledge. They are two different things, but they are not incompatible in any way, shape or form. A scientist believes that blue pills are more effective than red pills at sending people to sleep, and thus he sets up a scientific investigation to confirm or refute the hypothesis. This shows how belief is required in order to create new knowledge.
Belief and knowledge go together, not apart.
i dont have beliefs
knowledge is satan in the eyes of the believer.. obviusly the believer think they have knowledge, and that god is true
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by H501 4 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Generally I'm opposed to "vote bombing", no matter the circumstance, but Pro utterly failed here. Not only did Pro refuse to capitalize or add periods ( Losing them the conduct and grammar categories ), but they made no logical argument and did not use any sources
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.