The Instigator

Con (against)

melcharaz

Tied

0 Points

The Contender

Pro (for)

WrickItRalph

Tied

0 Points

Is Science Adequate As A Firm Foundation For Belief?

Add to My FavoritesReport this DebateShare with My Friends

Do you like this debate?No Yes-1

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)

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. Report this Argument 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. Report this Argument
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. Report this Argument Pro Does the section effect the links? Report this Argument
Con only in expressing the nature of science and how belief is part of it. Report this Argument Pro You know I once had an anecdote. . . . . Report this Argument
Con oh yeah? What kind? Report this Argument Pro that was the whole anecdote, Lol. Report this Argument

Post a Comment

153 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.

Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago

there will be a whole bunch of churches that will answer to God for supporting abominable sins.

Report this Comment

Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago

their*

Report this Comment

Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago

if a person unknowinglly sins, I will tell them what they do is sin and why. If they still continue, Thats business.

Report this Comment

Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago

I could care less why as long as you leave them alone.

Report this Comment

Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago

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.

Report this Comment

Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago

sorry, Said it backwards, Lol

Report this Comment

Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago

Kind of like your hate the sinner not the sin thing.

Report this Comment

Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago

I want to point out I don't hate religious people, Just religions

Report this Comment

Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago

well that's nice at least