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

How do atheists rationally 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  
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: 4/11/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 419 times Debate No: 89489
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




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.


Atheists, like other people have a some basic knowledge in their head, leading them to decisions on wether they believe something to be fact or fiction, good or bad. Like everyone they can be wrong about pretty much everything (again like everyone). They can make poor judgement calls and believe something false to be real and vis versa, but this is the same as everyone else. You cannot say that 10% of the population, cut off based on personal beliefs, is dumber than the rest of the population, if you believe they are wrong and that God exists, great, you or them could be wrong, it's a 50 50 chance. There is plenty of evidence saying God is real and plenty of evidence proving that evidence false. Both sides could be right!
Atheists, if you are saying they are dumber, have been found to be smarter and better at decision making than religious folk as they are not "blinded" by religion and God. As they serve themselves and humanity and not a possible higher being.

Also you are wrong that science relies on senses and reason, theories do, yes, but theories are often wrong. Actual, hard, science is based off proven fact and must be undoubtedly true!

Also I am slightly confused by this debate question, are you saying that as Atheists are different than you they are wrong, as they believe something else, a just as likely possibility, solution to the question of religion, to the world, to life?

Atheists as I have said rationally know truth from fiction like anyone else, they are not always right, it all depends on sense and how they view the world as anyone else, therefore they can be wrong, but so can you!

Finally why did you have to make it a max of 2000 words? It's just a "tiny" bit annoying!
Debate Round No. 1


This dude says "Atheists, like other people have a some basic knowledge in their head", but how does he know this? Can he please address the question and tell me how he, as an atheist, rationally knows truth from fiction?

And dude, please do not pretend to speak for science when you are utterly ignorant of it.


Sir, I am not an Athiest, I disagree with there beliefs, I personally am Jewish Agnostic. And by the way, the Jewish faith does allow there followers to be agnostic or Athiest unlike Christianity. And Athiests can make decisions again based off what they know. I can't prove they know things, but just based off humans biology they know things. I don't know you know anything, I don't know what other people know, neither do you. So the same question could go for any group of people, the argument for how Athiests tell truth from fiction is the same for any other group of people. How do you tell truth from fiction?

You make decisions off your beliefs OK, so does everyone else. These beliefs can be fact or fiction for Athiests, for you, for anyone.
Debate Round No. 2


This debate is for atheists only. Thus, this dude loses on that basis.

He also loses because he refuses to answer the one Q this debate is about.

I will respond no further to him.


Agnostic is close enough! Also I do not need to explain that 10% of the population can think just as well as you can! They believe that God doesn't exist and they often belief more in science than religious folk, but those are the only differences! If you think you are right, then by default they are wrong about religion and science, but that is it.

They have the same brain as you, they are the same species as you, they do not have any differences besides in certain beliefs!
Debate Round No. 3


ViceRegent forfeited this round.


Sanders2k16 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by zookdook1 2 years ago
57th post of the same topic! Huzzah!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Brendan21 2 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con refused to even debate with Pro after finding out Pro is not an atheist. Pro also provided good explanation of atheism that Con proceeded to ignore.