Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Debate: God Exists

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,617

    Default Debate: God Exists

    Dear all,

    I would like to run a debate titled God Exists. I would like two teams to be involved. One team is affirmative that argues for God; the other team argues against God. It is not a requirement to be a theist or atheist for either team. You may want to treat this debate as a hypothesis and an opportunity to cultivate your own critical thinking and argumentative skills.

    Each team may comprise of more than one member but both teams must have equal numbers of members.

    Would anyone be interested to get started?

    Thanks and regards

  2. #2
    Loki's Avatar
    Loki is offline You get what everyone gets....you get a lifetime Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    11,177

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    That's a bit of a false dichotomy you've got there Azu. The teams would be more like: one argues that GodTM exists, and the other team argues that the first team hasn't provided compelling evidence for their case.

    To argue that GodTM (or any other supernatural creature) definitely does not exist is to try and prove a negative.
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."Philip K. Dick


  3. Like button Sendraks, odd, DanDare, Banjo, MOAC liked this post
    Thank button gray-owl thanked this post
  4. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,617

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    We do not have evidence to prove that God exists. However, would arguing for God's existence in a purely speculative manner be acceptable? This is the approach that I want to adopt.

  5. Thank button gray-owl thanked this post
  6. #4

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    Can't really improve on what Loki says.

    It doesn't sound like a discussion which would be different to numerous other threads located in R.U.S.T, where folk assert that yes, there is a god, and the rest of us repeatedly ask for evidence to support the claim which is never forthcoming.

    As Loki has said, there is no need for anyone to prove a negative and no debate which hinges on shifting the burden of proof to one party, should be tolerated in the first place.

    Also which "god" are you talking about? You'd have to first begin by defining your terms and experience has taught me that you would never get past this point because, no other bloody theist ever has either. You'd wind up losing the debate by simply failing to clearly define your terms and/or being unable to reach agreement with your interlocutors as to your definitions.
    "One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

    "'Science doesn't know everything' - which is true. Because if it did, it would stop" - Dara O'Briain

  7. Like button 142857 liked this post
    Thank button gray-owl thanked this post
  8. #5

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    Quote Azurisan21 said View Post
    We do not have evidence to prove that God exists. However, would arguing for God's existence in a purely speculative manner be acceptable? This is the approach that I want to adopt.
    There's still no debate to be had. Why should anyone want to debate the purely speculative? Never mind the problems I've identified in my other post.
    "One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

    "'Science doesn't know everything' - which is true. Because if it did, it would stop" - Dara O'Briain

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,617

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    It is called a theory. Not all theories are directly proven upon evidence. Atheists do argue at times using pure speculation.

  10. #7

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    To be clear, its called "theory" in the loosest sense of the word, being synonymous with " "speculation" or "an idea."


    It is not a theory in the sense which those of us of a scientific background understand and use the word. A scientific theory is an area of study, supported by facts and hypothesis which have not been falsified. ALL scientific theories rely on evidence and NONE of them rely on speculation.

    I hope this illustrates the importance of getting your definitions right. You are not talking about "theory" in any sense that I would acknowledge.

    Atheists do argue at times using pure speculation.
    Example please.
    "One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

    "'Science doesn't know everything' - which is true. Because if it did, it would stop" - Dara O'Briain

  11. Like button Athe1st, hackenslash liked this post
  12. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,617

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    Is superstring theory based on evidence? I don't think so. That is one example used by scientists.

  13. #9

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    Yes, superstring theory isn't a scientific theory, it is 'theory' in the sense of speculation put forward by scientists.

    Even the speculative ideas such as string theory are being put forward by people who have more than a "grounding" in science and are, in some cases, extrapolating from existing scientific theories.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theore...tream_theories

    By comparison, the existence of "god" (which one, by the way? define your terms please) is pure speculation based on absolutely nothing.
    "One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

    "'Science doesn't know everything' - which is true. Because if it did, it would stop" - Dara O'Briain

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,417

    Default Re: Debate: God Exists

    Quote Sendraks said View Post
    By comparison, the existence of "god" (which one, by the way? define your terms please) is pure speculation based on absolutely nothing.
    I completely get what you are saying and I agree 100% apart from one tiny thing:

    Even as an almost lifelong atheist I would disagree that belief in God is based on absolutely nothing.

    I know people who sincerely believe that they have met God. In their case their belief in God is based on first-hand experience (admittedly with no other evidence). Eyewitness testimony is classed as evidence. And those people have insisted that I should believe in God because they have met him and I should trust them on that.

    There are also stories in old books. Now this is poor evidence as those books are known to contain factual errors and are internally inconsistent. But still, we should acknowledge the existence of that evidence and objectively grade its credibility rather than saying that it doesn't exist.

  15. Like button Darwinsbulldog liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •