The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
kastanj
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

truth is knowledge

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/5/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 229 times Debate No: 94463
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

vi_spex

Pro

religion is belief..

whatever truth is in the bible is not religious
kastanj

Con

I accept this challenge and will argue for why it is not the case that truth is knowledge and evaluate any argument my opponent puts forward for the case that truth, in fact, is knowledge.

My opening argument goes as follows:

1. Some state of the world pertained before any agent existed such that it could have knowledge.
2. If (1), then something can be the truth without it being knowledge.
3. By (1) and (2), it follows that something can be the truth without it being knowledge.
4. By Leibniz law, if something is true of x that is not true of y, it cannot be the case that x and y is the same thing.
Conclusion: From (3) and (4) I conclude that truth is not knowledge.

If this is not in fact the disputed claim intended by my opponent, I could make a similar argument for the claim he makes about religion being belief. Further, when he writes "whatever truth is in the bible is not religious", I assume he means something in the lines of: "No true statement in the bible is about some supernatural entity or phenomenon existing or have happened". If this is what my opponent meant, then I forfeit this debate as I would agree with him (and I'm not interested in debating that particular question).
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

1. evolution.. but i have a higher level perspective: life being nature, there is no before life.. also as i see it, evolution is eternal.. life does not grow out of rock or something
2. reality is true.. truth is in the past

hm i think you see it.. if the bible claims there are stones on the beach it dosnt make me a christian to accept that statement
i should have probably mentioned this in the first round
kastanj

Con

To clarify,
"1. Some state of the world pertained before any agent existed such that it could have knowledge." does not assume anything about life, nature or whatever. This simply says that sometime the world was such that nobody had any knowledge (Like 13,8 billion years ago, a couple of seconds after the Big bang). Do you disagree with that? (Btw, I would recommend you at least watching "Cosmos" with Neil deGrasse Tyson to learn some more about the universe and evolution).

Do you intend for "reality is true.. truth is in the past" to be a counter argument against premise 2 in my argument? If so, then some clarification on your position and the relevance would be helpful to have a meaningful discussion here.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

i dont believe in big bang, matter=transformation

evolution=survival+adaptation

to me a universe is an imaginary idea.. view of a full mountain fallacy..

reality is true.. truth can only be in the past
reality=now
kastanj

Con

Your beliefs ought to be based on evidence. Believe only that which your evidence points toward the most. Evidence for a proposition p is simply something that makes p more likely to be true. Making claims without any supporting argument whatsoever does not provide any evidence that suggests that what you are saying is true.

You say you don't believe in the Big bang theory, but if you want to use this to counter my argument, then you need to argue for why you think that Big bang didn't happen. You did also say "matter=transformation" in a seeming attempt to support your claim, but I do not see how this is relevant at all.

What the "universe is to you" is of no importance here. In a debate, and as a seeker of truth, you need to give your opponent reasons to accept your views. A discussion is not about someone making a claim, and then someone else making a contrary claim until somebody gives up. If you can't explain why you believe what you do, then perhaps you don't understand the things you believe either.

Taking all evidence available to you for a theory or claim into consideration (internet is pretty good for this), before making your own theories can be helpful to really understand your own beliefs as well.

Even if it would be true (which I don't believe), the claim "truth can only be in the past" is compatible with my opening argument. If there was sometime in the past in which something was true without there being knowledge at that time, then it is false that truth is knowledge.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
my proposition includes that you can not prove any belief to be true, ever.
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
same
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
if you know it, is it then false?
Posted by kastanj 3 months ago
kastanj
Alright, so you don't listen to reason.
Perhaps you'd like to listen to some music instead?
https://www.youtube.com...
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
no, because if they are false they are not true.

everything that exist has an opposite for it to exist

belief=be lie
Posted by kastanj 3 months ago
kastanj
If beliefs are false, then it is possible for them to be false. By definition then, beliefs can be false. And just because a certain belief can be false, doesn't mean that it is, in the same way that you can troll without actually doing it. Protip.
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
if beliefs are false they are false, not can be false.. if belief can be false is it false?

knowledge is unchanging, knowledge is truth

know is true

human=chimpanze=fish=life
Posted by kastanj 3 months ago
kastanj
If beliefs are false, then then also can be false. That is what "can" means. A belief can be false = it is possible for a belief to be false.

If knowledge is analyzed as something similar to a true, justified belief, then knowledge can't be wrong. This is because something that is true can't be false. However, there's more to knowledge than only truth, then is is still not the same thing even if something that is true of truth is also true of knowledge. This is so in the same way as you are not a chimpanzee even if both of you have eyes.
Posted by vi_spex 3 months ago
vi_spex
beliefs are false not can be false

can knowledge be wrong?
Posted by kastanj 3 months ago
kastanj
Is your belief that beliefs are false also false?
No votes have been placed for this debate.