most debate worthy subject that can exist
Debate Rounds (5)
i can close my eyes and imagine that there are no rocks, and believe that they simply dissapeared
facts are in the past, past dosnt matter, rocks are matter
In response, I would like to question the purpose of the affirmative's statement.
What are you trying to say? Rocks being made up of matter does not qualify the questioning of their existence, therefore, why do you find this such a worthy debate topic?
I personally believe that we have more important things to argue about than rocks. Current world issues or subjects of public interest are more suitable for a debate topic and are more relevant than the existence of rocks.
my point is.. if its not debate worthy that there are rocks becasue we see rocks and have plenty of memory of rocks, then is the subject of there being a god debate worthy? to contrast
I am slightly confused so I assume that I misconceived the purpose of this debate. So I am going to assume that what im about to say is arguing the correct thing but if I am wrong please tell me.
Yes, we can see rocks. Therefore this means that there is no value in arguing over their existence. However, God is not a visible being and therefore it would be valid to debate over his existence. I propose that a better debate topic would be to argue on something that is subjective rather than debating the existence of something the rest of the world confirms is true. Moral issues are perhaps the most debate worthy topics because it both brings different points of view into light, promoting informed thought on important topics, and helps to gather public interest and opinion in a topic.
my entire point is, if its subjective, there is no point in debating it, as it just as clear you dont know that, as you know there are rocks
In the context of; is there a god? You say that we cant see God, therefore we shouldn't debate over his existence. Yes, it is true that you cannot see God, however, how would you argue any other theory or religion. Evolution lacks just as much evidence as Christianity does. If we take a pretence that we can't see wind, or we cant see heat, it is obvious that they both exist despite the fact that we cant see them. The same goes for any other subjective topic. There is no point arguing on a definitive topic because common knowledge and facts blatantly disproves any different statement. There is proof that rocks exist (I would doubt you'd come across anyone who disagrees with this fact) therefore its not debatable. We can't see God therefore, we debate on his existence. It is a subjective topic.
i breathe, and i feel Wind, i hear Wind, i see Wind in a snow storm
to my experience god is simply information, i am not a unicorn but you can believe in me
are you more certain that there are rocks then that there is no god?
We all know for a fact and are certain that rocks do exist.
Therefore, it is more scholarly to argue on something we perceive differently
rather than debating the existence of an existing object.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.