The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Absolute Truth exists.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/30/2019 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 553 times Debate No: 120090
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)




Absolute truth exists because of a few simple, Logical reasons:
1. If there was no absolute truth, We wouldn't be debating the TRUTH in each of these issues.
2. The opposite, The statement: "there is no absolute truth, " is contradictory. If there is no absolute truth, Then the statement previously mentioned cannot be absolutely true.
Based on these two simple facts, Absolute truth exists.


1) If truth was absolute we wouldn't be having this discussion because it would be self evident. Meaning everything said in this discussion will be wrong because the truth is above our understanding, Unless the truth magically aligns with your beliefs. Your opinion/interpretation/conclusion of events is based off of multiple variables that are beyond your control which makes everything we do biased in nature. Bias cannot exist in a universe with absolute truth due to the fact that it allows uncertainty and elements beyond our scope. It's highly improbable that a human is capable of knowing everything behind an event and reaching a satisfactory answer.

2) The statement "there is no absolute truth" by itself does prove to be problematic, But by adding a few words we can change what that implies. For example: "There is no absolute truth because our understanding of the "truth" is subjective". I don't want to play semantics and I want to avoid circular logic, So I ask you to present an absolute truth without thinking about it. Should be easy to do with an absolute, Right?

A) It would also help if you defined what "absolute", "truth" and any other key words you plan to use. My definition of subjective is simply "characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind ".
Debate Round No. 1


In response to my opponent's first point: even though absolute truth exists, We may not see it at the time. The fact that we can't always SEE the absolute truth is not evidence that it doesn't exist. That just doesn't make any sense.

In response to his second argument: If he wants to change the words of the resolution around, Then he can maybe get around the idea that it is contradictory. But here is a simple fact: he accepted the challenge. In other words, He decided that he could NEGATE the resolution. If he cannot truly negate the affirmative side of the resolution, Then this round immediately flows to the pro side! He accepted the resolution by accepting the challenge. If he cannot do his job in this debate round, Then he automatically has lost the round. You cannot accept the title and then try to change it to fit your argument.

So what we have seen here is first, That his first argument falls apart because it doesn't fit simple logic. Second, We see that he tried to get around the resolution in a vain attempt to argue his side more adequately. All in all, What we have seen so far is that the only side with truth backing it up is the pro side.


kwbc forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


My opponent has given this debate over to me. I believe that he knows that he couldn't defend the idea that absolute truth doesn't exist. Thank you for all of you who commented on this round, And thank you to my opponent. I enjoyed this debate, And I look forward to more in the upcoming future.



kwbc forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
Yeah sure create the debate so that it is open. I will accept it tomorrow if no one before me accepting it accepts it themselves.
Posted by Eugenious 3 years ago
Would you like to debate this exact topic, Or perhaps something more creation v. Evolution?
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago

I would like to debate you on this topic since Con did not finish the debate.
Posted by Eugenious 3 years ago
Once again, What you just said isn't true. You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that because we argue about it, It exists. What I'm saying is that when we are debating, We are attempting to prove the TRUTH! Why would we attempt to find something that doesn't exist? Or if it exists, And is always changing, Why would we worry about debating it? If it's going to change, Us arguing it is just a waste of time. Your questions are based on misunderstanding and flawed logic. My opponent forfeited anyway! So please, Enough with your annoying comments. Thank you for helping to challenge my opinion, Though. This was fun, And thank you to everyone involved!
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
You just invalidated your claim yourself.

"The fact that we are trying to discover the truth means that the truth must be there, Or else it is pointless. "

So now it goes from

1. If we're discussing it it exists.


2. If we're discussing it it either exists or the discussion is pointless.

So we can just say the discussion is pointless.

Hand-waving a clear analogy where your logic is applied 100% consistently is OK because you have no counter to it.

No part of your "logic" is logical. Otherwise, No one who studies logic would think that absolute truth doesn't exist.

Way to also hand-wave the moral side of it.

Please tell us, Does absolute truth exist for everything or just some things. If only some things, How is that any different from my position? Some things are facts. That doesn't mean they can't be changed. Is absolute truth a constantly shifting thing? If so, What does it matter that absolute truth exists if no one knows what it is?

But by all means, Find me a few ph. Ds with some sort of logic degree to agree with you. I'll wait.
Posted by Eugenious 3 years ago
What you just said is very illogical. I said that the fact that we are trying to discover the truth means that the truth must be there! It's pointless to argue if there isn't actually truth to arrive at! And your application with the unicorn? Seriously? Please don't insult all of our intelligence with that ludicrous comparison. I am talking about something that is non-physical: the truth! Different arguments apply to each of these. Please refrain from lowering the level of logic on this debate. Thank you!
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
There's nothing logical about the way Pro supports what he is saying.

People arguing about whether or not 'absolute truth' exists doesn't make it true. That is like me saying people arguing about whether or not unicorns exist makes them exist. It is among the most illogical statements I've ever read on this site.

When someone says "there is no absolute truth" isn't contradictory. Some things may absolutely be true without literally everything having absolute truth. Saying "absolute truth exists" suggests it exists for everything.

If someone puts a gun to my head and points to a woman and says "rape that woman and I'll let you both live. If you don't, I'll kill you both. " There is no 'absolute truth' in this scenario. Morality isn't always so black and white as to have a 'true' answer. There are many rules and laws that can be bent or broken in the right circumstances.

While there may be absolute truth, I don't know it and I don't believe you know it, And neither of us can point to anyone else who knows it. So it's a maybe. It isn't a yes or a no.

The methods Pro has used to defend his position are illogical. Absolutely.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago

"unless you accept that there is objective truth, There is no way for this to be true. There can be truth and people that misunderstand it, But not the other way around. "
Maybe it is an assumption so that there is a ground for such a discussion.

What is your proof of objective truth?
Posted by logicae 3 years ago

Well said. It is quite sad to see the way society is moving.


I like that you are taking on Pro's argument, Good clash, But I would like to ask a few questions:

1. Can certain truths exist and not be known or well understood yet? Why does truth have to be self evident?
2. Would it be reasonable to say that through reason, Certain things can be found to be factually true. For example: Gravity is in every case is found to exist and is always measurable.

"There is no absolute truth because our understanding of the "truth" is subjective"

3. I see what you tried to do here, But the contradiction still remains. You make a truth claim that "our understanding of the "truth" is subjective", Unless you accept that there is objective truth, There is no way for this to be true. There can be truth and people that misunderstand it, But not the other way around.

To Truth! -logicae
Posted by Surgeon 3 years ago
Yes it does. Absolute truth exists. There is no debate for those who use reason as there primarily epistemic grounding. For those Post-Modernists out there everything is relative, Even the statement "everything is relative", Thus they debunk themselves.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by timmyjames 3 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: When pro proved his point, Con tried to change the resolution after he accepted the debate and forfeited two rounds

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.