The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Deism is Not a Rational Alternative to Religion Or Atheism

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
John_C_1812 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 686 times Debate No: 99395
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




Lightning fast mini-debate on why any credence should be given to Deism.
Not a debate on God's existence, but rather the pros and cons of a Deistic philosophy.
I am for the resolution.
R1- Acceptance
R2- Openings
R3- Rebuttals
R4- Closings


Taking the side Con.

I will attempt to establish basic principle which links Deism, Religion and Atheism. Deity is a State openly admitting groups of people may hold something others may admire.

"IN GOD WE TRUST." Vs. "In Natures GOD we trust." When the term nature is super imposed on GOD, it begins to describe separation by use of no representation. It is not describing a request for equal protection under order of law.
Debate Round No. 1


Deism is the stance taken by theists who, for whatever reason, fear taking the final leap into atheism. Deists believe in a being that is responsible for the creation of the universe, but reject the idea that this being interacts with us.

Theists at least are able to say that they 'feel' the presence of God(s) within themselves. This may be a cop-out, as it is ultimately referring to subjective experience, but it is still non-falsifiable. Deists, on the other hand, don't even have this! They like to say that reason alone has led them to this belief, but reason based on what experience?

I can reason my way onto Wall Street, but unless my philosophizing is based upon some kind of experience of business, this will never win me a million dollars, or ensure I have a clear picture of what stockbrokers do for a living.

The same is true for Deism. Unless you have experience of the divine, explaining the divine is fanciful. Yet Deists deny human-divine interaction altogether!
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by John_C_1812 2 years ago
G3Pf Hypothesis that a deity created the Universe and more can be empirically supported.
Posted by AmericanDeist 2 years ago
Amarandum, you don't understand deism at all.
Posted by G3PF 2 years ago
While I do believe pro is right, I don't believe their points were the best against deism, as it felt more like an ad hom against deism rather than arguments against it. Personally, against deism, I'd argue that it's unscientific to make an assumption that a deity created the universe without any solid evidence for it. At most, it's a glorified hypothesis, but no one should take a stance on any hypothesis that has no empirical support.
Posted by John_C_1812 2 years ago
Sorry had to go.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.