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

How do atheists ratiionally know truth from fiction?

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
ViceRegent has forfeited round #3.
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: 12/8/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 437 times Debate No: 97805
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Atheists love to live under the delusion that they are the guardians of rationality. But how can they hold this title when they cannot even articulate a rational way to know truth from fiction. If they cannot do this, they are literally ignorant and the ignorant cannot guard anything. So, what atheist can give me a rational way atheists know truth from fiction?

Answering this question is the sole purpose for this debate. If you are unable or unwilling to answer this question, do not respond to this debate. Likewise, if you do not believe in reality, believe you make it up or deny it is objective or knowable, or if you do not know how to rationally know truth from fiction, do not respond to this debate. If you are terrified of cross-examination or madly in love with red herrings, do not respond to this debate. If you have responded before, do not respond to this debate. After all, if you had nothing rational to say then, you will having nothing rational to say now.

If all you have is "science", do not respond to this debate, for science relies on the your senses and reason, which begs the question of how you know your senses and reason are valid. Perhaps you can tell me, which is fine, but if the way you validate you senses and reason is with your senses and reason, you lose the debate because that is circular reasoning and circular reasoning is not rational.

if you respond in violation of these rules, you automatically lose the debate.


You do know that to believe in something you have heard, read or been indoctrinated, you must rely on your senses. Your vision, your hearing etc. all lead you to believing in some random deity. Basically what you said is: "Senses aren't valid unless they reassure my dogmatic and irrational beliefs." You are trying to seclude yourself from any criticism and debate by making rules that should insure that you can go on living your life with a false sense of security in your beliefs.

OK, so, how do we know rationally know truth from fiction? Say I tell you that Yahweh is real (I'm presuming you are Christian), you would probabally be like: "Well, duh!". But say if I said that Allah is real and Muhammad really was his prophet? You would probabally get all defensive and say that Allah is fiction and Muhammad is a liar. You would do the same with Buddha, Khrishna, etc. So, how can you tell that your God is the truth and that the other ones are fiction? Through observation of the Holy Books? Well, as you said yourself, since we don't know if our senses are valid, how can your senses be valid? If you felt God in your heart how do you know that it is valid since you don't know if your senses are valid. If you are reading the Bible, how do you know you are reading the Bible and that it isn't actually just a product of your senses?

And if you were reffering to how our senses and our minds can be tricked, that's something different. If you are thinking of those optical illusions for example, yes, they are weird, yes, they do seem super-natural, but no, they aren't unexplainable. They can be explained logically, whilst god cannot as he is a complete contradiction. That's why in experiments and scientific observations ALL variables are taken into account and they must be repeated with close enough results to conclude if the conclusion is valid.
Debate Round No. 1


The fool spilled all those words and utterly failed to tell me how he rationally know fact from fiction. Another irrational atheist loser bites the dust.


Here's a little something I thought of whilst I was at the toilet. Let's say we could proove god through mere observation and science (something we haven't and may not ever do). It would be quite irrational for me to say that god doesn't exist in that scenario by saying: "Oh, we don't know if our senses are valid." You would most likely presume that I was mentally challenged since you could rationally prove to me that god was real through observation and evidence in that scenario. But in this world we live in there is more than enough evidence that god (or, at the very least, the God of the Bible) is mere folklore.

Also, you're saying that we can not use science because our senses may not be valid. Well, then don't use the computer since we got computers through robotics and mathematics which are branches of science. I mean, if you think science is not valid because our senses may not be valid (and there is no way that you could possibly know that) than you reject science. And if you get to reject some proven branches of science, you should also reject other proven branches of science.

Also, how do you know our senses aren't valid? Did you observe it? Did you test it? Well you couldn't have, because your observations would've been invalid since your senses are invalid. And don't give me some type of pholosophical nonsense like: "Oh, but they MIGHT be invalid or fabricated." You need to present evidence before making such a bold claim.
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
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Doom-Guy-666-1993 1 year ago
Would you kindly stop posting this same question? you've been spamming for quite a while and its amusing yet annoying.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
Step 1: Build the frame for the top of your bench, using 2 " 47R43; pieces and 2 " 10R43; pieces to create a rectangle. Use corner clamps to hold the frame in place and drill two pilot holes in each corner. Add a 2R43; deck screw in each hole and countersink so the screw sits flush with the wood.
Step 2 is coming please stand by.
Posted by boozeandbabble 1 year ago
He's using parody to entertain himself.
I've never, NEVER heard any deist\theist claim truth is unknowable,
They unanimously assert that God created the universe in an orderly way whereby reality is discernable through sense, reason, and logic. This dude actually negates sense and reason saying, "you lose debate" if you use them. His profile says he's posted this same debate nearly 200 times. He obviously views this as some sort of satire.
Sucker'em in and give'em insults. What a dud!
This debate has 2 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.