The Instigator
melcharaz
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
WrickItRalph
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Is Science Adequate As A Firm Foundation For Belief?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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: 2/27/2019 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,204 times Debate No: 120523
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (153)
Votes (0)

 

melcharaz

Con

I put this in philosophy section to debate the concept of relying on a system. I hold the position that science is not adequate to base information upon. My reasoning in this is that it is a man made form of acquiring and spreading knowledge that is based solely on mankind's interaction with this world and space and other things beyond it. I believe that we are insufficient to observe everything in an objective manner and that the subjection's of our observations make science an unstable belief mechanism.

I would like anyone to defend the position of believing sciences as a source of dependence for mankind regarding the understanding of the universe.

I apologize if the words I use are poorly suited in conveying my thought.
WrickItRalph

Pro

Thanks for the interesting debate topic.

So I will be making the argument that science is a firm foundation for belief, Due to it's practical uses.

I will argue that beliefs formed by science are useful EVEN if we can't absolutely verify them.

I will argue that science has advanced our technology to the point that we have been able to gain a robust understanding of the universe and that we will one day have the true origins of life.

Your floor.
Debate Round No. 1
melcharaz

Con

due to previous problems with links we have agreed to try the debate over at science section. ill just type words until debate is finished i guess.
WrickItRalph

Pro

Does the section effect the links?
Debate Round No. 2
melcharaz

Con

only in expressing the nature of science and how belief is part of it.
WrickItRalph

Pro

You know I once had an anecdote. . . . .
Debate Round No. 3
melcharaz

Con

oh yeah? What kind?
WrickItRalph

Pro

that was the whole anecdote, Lol.
Debate Round No. 4
153 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
there will be a whole bunch of churches that will answer to God for supporting abominable sins.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
their*
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
if a person unknowinglly sins, I will tell them what they do is sin and why. If they still continue, Thats business.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
I could care less why as long as you leave them alone.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
you don't know why i don't support it. If you want to know, Ask. Don't assume every reason that aligns with your morality is a good one.

I walk by faith, Not by religion.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
sorry, Said it backwards, Lol
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
Kind of like your hate the sinner not the sin thing.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
I want to point out I don't hate religious people, Just religions
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
well that's nice at least
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
no
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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