Philosophy Debate Topics — page 12

2,288 debate topics, all ages. Debatable motions with arguments for and against. Open the arguments below, pick one at random, or present them full-screen.

All agesDebatePage 12 of 46

551.
Speciesism is unjustified under preference utilitarianism
For
===Marginal Cases=== My opponent argues that ethical paralysis is the outcome of not being able to determine which preferences outweigh others, thus a meta-principle favoring humans is necessary. My opponent attempts to substantiate this point by arguing that utilitarianism is…
===Alleged speciesism is a PU framework===First to my opponent's re-definition of the trolley problem. My first objection is that he takes a single scenario and unjustifiably generalizes from it. It is true that in this scenario (5 dolphins vs. 1 presumably normal human), the…
Against
Thanks to Pinko for an awesome round! :D C1: Hierarchy of Interests Marginal Cases Pinko attempts to disprove my impact of ethical paralysis by saying there is no ethical dilemma in the case of a chimpanzee and a brain-orphan. However this doesn't disprove anything because it…
Thanks to Pinko for arguing a persuading and substantive case!! :DC1: HierarchyMarginal CasesPinko makes the mistake of not directly addressing my argument as it was, but rather he simply restated the problem surrounding specisism. He argues that I am applying an unnecessary…
552.
An omniscient God and human free will are incompatible
For
.
There is no dispute of definition. Co does not understand "subject to chance" in actions means there is a "chance", meaning you will decide to do one thing over another. (There is a chance you could do this, or do that.)Since my arguments, definitions, and analogies are going…
Against
Reiteration Pro repeats an argument which I already responded to. His argument can be summarized with the following: P1. Necessarily, if God foreknows X, then X will happen. P2. God foreknows X. C1. Therefore, X will necessarily happen. However, I already spent my entire Round…
Dispute Over Definition First off, this is my debate. As the Instigator I reside the sole authority over definition. My rule stated that all definitions are to be used in context. Your definition is not in context of the resolution, and I already demonstrated why that it is…
553.
Ontological arguments make God's existence more likely
For
R1: Rebuttal to Salam's assertion that my argument is not an ontological one: Salam stated; "Ontological Arguments are philosophical arguments for the existence of God that uses ontology." [sic] -Con this is entirely true. However, this definition is only helpful if we know…
Thank you very much for the challenge and sorry for the wait, here is my only OA. I didn't have time for pictures or links to the works of supporting philosophers but I did manage to produce an ontological argument for the existence of God, with some serious thought, from my…
Against
I am not sure what Pro intended from this meeting, but it appears that Pro didn't defend the OA, but rather some of the initial assertions he originally made. I will address those comments and also show why Pro's OA is not sound. R1: Ontological or Not Ontological, that's the…
I'll be honest; I am not sure where to start. The proposition of this debate is that "Ontological arguments (OA) make God's existence at least slightly more likely". Pro claims that he provided an OA, but what he provided is hardly an OA, but I will do my best to address his…
554.
The existence of God cannot be logically defended
For
First of all, nice job copying and pasting literally everything you wrote from this URL: http://www.catholicforum.com... Next, lets go to the actual arguments that "you" made, but first we should go back to the original premise that I made saying that my interpretation of God…
When evaluating the existence or lack of existence of anything in conventional logic, you require positively correlating evidence, and operation through logical and scientific processes. There are many reasons why I would reject the logical assumption of God(s), or at least…
Against
What real evidence can be supplied for God's existence? St. Thomas, in his Summa Theologica, sets forth five separate proofs for the existence of God, Unlike St. Anselm's proof, which deals with pure concepts, St. Thomas' proofs rely on the world of our experience-what we can…
It was done in a lab. It was truthful. I think you need hearing aids or something because the video clearly said it was sent to NY for testing, were it began in a lab. Because something like this happened, your only hope was to assume some scientist fudged the data. Really?!…
555.
The conflict between science and religion is really about worldviews
For
Isn't posting my argument.
Let me begin with addressing natural selection and then I will attempt to address the transitional forms you mentioned in this Round. Let's listen in on a hypothetical conversation between a biblical creationist (C) and an evolutionist (E) as they discuss some recent scientific…
Against
"Could this process cause the increase in genetic information necessary for. . . . Evolution? " Yes. Let's examine a few types of genetic mutations shall we? Missense mutation; the substitution of one amino acid for another, Doesn't create nor destroy information. But what…
"Natural selection cannot produce design. " You are assuming the presence of design in the first place, Design being the very thing that's under dispute. You are begging the question. "Abiogenesis is used. How did life come about for evolution, Except by abiogenesis. "…
556.
It is reasonable to infer a supernatural cause of existence
For
it's not really an argument from ignorance. what we observe are violations of nature, apparently. that's not based on ignorance but observation. medical sitautions are somewhat different because we always have observed natural excplanations. it would be expected there would be…
God's existence - it is reasonable to infer a supernatural cause of existence bottom line: if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. if you see a magician who waves his wand and makes cats turn into dogs, you could argue a natural explanation is possible,…
Against
After my claim that telling cosmologists that there's a supernatural explanation for "violations" of nature, or, as I call them, mysteries, is like a lesser informed patient telling a doctor that a medical mystery would be better solved by supernatural medicine... Pro responds…
Thanks for the debate Pro, I love the topic.Pro has set up a giant argument from ignorance that if we can't explain something then by default it must be supernatural/god.It is unreasonable to infer a supernatural cause of existence simply because we can't explain something…
557.
The Kalam cosmological argument firmly establishes God's existence
For
Hi, Look forward to the debate. I will wait for you to explain why the KCA is not strong, and I will respond to your points.
Ok, I think I get it. There are two fundamental points which are wrong here: "The theist is trying to claim that the Universe began to exist, that is, there was a state in which there was God, "and then" there was a state in which there was the Universe" However, many theists…
Against
Debate on whether the KCA is irrefutable and strong.
Okay let's address the first objection that is under Counter-Apologetics. What don't you understand about It? It basically means that before the universe existed there was no time since time is a property of the universe and since effects follow the causes and cannot be…
558.
Atheism is more reasonable than theism
For
As per debate rules, Con's second forfeit is regarded as a concession of the debate.
Unfortunately, Con has forfeited. As stated in debate rules, this means he automatically loses the conduct point. I only hope he can return in time for us to continue the debate. Extend argument from last round.
Against
I appreciate Unitedandy's challenge and I accept. I agree with all the rules and regulations put forth by my opponent. I think he has done a good job in the structuring of this debate, I see no need for any improvement or add-ons. I look forward to a pleasant(though heated)…
559.
Arguments for the existence of God are logically valid
For
In similar fashion, wonder and majesty: http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...
lol, of course I accept my clever win! I thank my opponent for such an entertaining debate - and love his little logic lesson at the end of his argument. Logic is a brilliant field of philosophy, and is one of the hardest to master! As a fan of logic, I wish for us to debate…
Against
I felt I needed to post something of wonder and majesty in this round; hope you all enjoy these... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... Best wishes, Chrysippus (the lesser :)
I thank my worthy opponent for her swift and ingenious post. It must be said, winning is not always important; sometimes the lessons learned by losing far outweigh any benefits of winning. In such a case I find myself tonight. I made an error in my initial definitions and the…
560.
Atheism is based on faith
For
"This debate is getting off-track. The topic is not atheism itself, but whether or not it is based on faith." Actually it's not really. I argued that Atheism is not based on faith. Allow me to some up my argument: The Bible is historically accurate, and this is a proven…
"The burden is not on atheists to offer proof that there is no such thing as God." Yes it is. It is ludicrous to say you do not have to prove something you openly claim. You claim there is no God. Atheism: the doctrine or belief that there is no God. You say there is no God?…
Against
This debate is getting off-track. The topic is not atheism itself, but whether or not it is based on faith. "You say there is no God? Prove it. You claim it, you have to prove it. Saying you are waiting for evidence for God's existence is more Agnosticism than Atheism. An…
"If you can prove there is no God, then this argument will bear weight. There is not enough scientific evidence to prove or disprove the existence of a God, so it takes faith to believe either way." I have had this debate many times. The burden is not on atheists to offer proof…
561.
Pascal's Wager is a good argument for belief in God
For
I will reply quite simply here. The truth of Catholicism as a basis for the Wager is not implicit in my argument--rather that, given Pascal's proofs, the Catholic Christian faith is, strictly speaking, the proper object of the Wager. Nevertheless the one supreme creator God…
I'll concede the language point as it isn't that important. 1.) I'm to some extent sympathetic to your point here. Pascal does hold that Catholic Christianity is the true religion. But he argues why this is the case! He knows that he has to offer proofs. He doesn't just assume…
Against
1a. True, he has other "proofs," yet I find none of them convincing. You give an excellent example of why this is so: the dominance of Christianity throughout the world. I repeat once more, this is a classic argumentum ad populum fallacy. In the 1800s, the vast majority of the…
Firstly, I think objecting to my language is odd. The language doesn't matter, as long as it conveys the same meaning. When he says "infinite gain" or "infinite loss," he means heaven and hell. Furthermore, it doesn't have any affect on the validity of any arguments, so it is…
562.
The right to life is a negative right
For
This round left blank
1. "I agree that PRO is presenting a false trichotomy...this trichotomy is of PRO's design, not CON's. It is PRO who believes that there is a difference between action and inaction when it comes to the death of an individual...I do not believe there is a distinction."There is a…
Against
RebuttalAs PRO has brought in new sources in his closing, I will also do the same.R1) PRO has dropped the fact that he has brought out a false trichotomy, that of 1) Life, 2) Death through Action, and 3) Death through Inaction. This trichotomy leads PRO to the erroneous…
He is indeed correct in that my three scenarios all point to the same moral dilemma, that of negligence causing death. His rebuttal is somewhat philosophical, as he focuses on a "false trichotomy", the supposed difference between active killing and passive negligence, and the…
563.
Christian theism is a reasonable belief
For
Upon a reasonable perspective, let"s start with God himself. God can be all powerful, all seeing, and all loving. But He is not a trinity, that is a miscinstructed idea by the Catholic Church that can easily be disproven by the Bible itself. For example, when God speaks with…
1. Acceptance by many does not equal truth. The Bible itself provides evidence refuting the existence of the trinity. Therefore, if the trinity does not exist, it is not a contradiction, since it is untrue. 2. I provided an example of the similarities between human and the Holy…
Against
First debate on this website for myself so have restricted the character count to 1000 to prevent large essays from forming. Definition Reasonable means to be valid, sound, and to be more probable than its (mathematical) conjugate Christian Theism means an omnipotent,…
1. The crucifixion narrative is not really dependant on specific details regarding if it was a cross or stake that is trivial but rather that he was executed as part of a ritual to take the sins of others. Further there has been no argument that the trinity itself is not a well…
564.
Atheism should be defined as lack of belief in God
For
RESPONSES "I won't say that this situation is impossible. This is a purely relative scenario. A friend of you explaining about you to somebody else is not going to impact your absolute nature and no property of you will be altered, but the understanding of Billy Bob about you.…
We both agree that a thing either exists or it doesn't. We have no disagreement on that point. What we disagree about is whether it is possible to not believe in something. According to you, it is only possible to believe in something and to believe it does not exist. If that…
Against
Thanks Yvette for the post…. My opponent is confused with absolute concepts and Relative ideas and seems like, trying to explain both with the same relative terms. "Of-Course it is possible no to believe in something." This is purely personal as explained in the previous post.…
Thanks for the post… [Billy Bob accepts that his friend may indeed have a millionaire as an ally, that I may indeed exist. But he is not convinced, because it is an extraordinary claim which is dubious at best. It is possible, but dubious. His position is one of doubt. He does…
565.
There is no proof that God exists
For
I am really sorry if I wasn't specific but NOW you know what I am looking for. You still refuse to debate with me. You can either argue against me or leave because nothing you have said I can debate against because it is TRUE. We can talk ALL day on the definition of a god or…
Stop trying to be such a smarty pants. In the comments I mentioned I wanted proof for either Christian, Muslim, or Jewish god. You are just wasting my time with things I already know. If you stop supporting my side maybe I will have a proper debate. If you are trying to…
Against
My opponent asserts that: 'In the comments I mentioned I wanted proof for either Christian, Muslim, or Jewish god.'However, when I accepted this debate that comment was not extant. The only thing I had to go off of was this assertion made by my opponent:'I realize that this…
Ok, I change my argument.My argument is no longer the Big Bang, but instead is the Laws of Physics. The Laws of Physics fulfill the criteria of dictating the natural universe and causing the Big Bang, therefore creating it. Thus the Laws of Physics can be referred to as the…
566.
Inalienable rights can be justified in an atheistic world
For
My opponent conceded
Thanks for the quick reply. First on my opponents The Universality of Rights When I say the American government, it is made in the resolution that the "American concept" of american rights. Now I was proving my point by saying that the "American" government regulates and…
Against
I'll make quick work of this. The Universality of Rights Within the third paragraph Pro immediately drops the universality of rights by saying that "the possesor [sic] will have to be the American government. " If rights are restricted to the political lines on the map, they…
Full Topic: The resolution states, "In an atheistic world, the American concept of inalienable rights is based on sound reasoning". That is to say, that in the absence of deities or a higher power, the concept that life, liberty, and property are universally inalienable is…
567.
Atheism creates a false view of reality
For
Sorry for my poor quality grammar. Do you still agree that a Atheist is not creating a false reality? For wouldn't it make more sense if Christians were not since we claim to have a connection from an out side source, that being God. I have said many times that if we humans…
So you might say, well of course a Athiest alike all will say, 'No, my reality is false.' A Athiest chooses not to believe in God for what reason? I am only suggesting this to you, but would it not be more better for you individually to put your faith, life into the hands of a…
Against
First, I do not believe that God exists because the idea of a God contains the possibility for a God to create the universe. That sounds pretty illogical captain, but you or anyone else may believe what they want, just don't assume we have to do the same. In terms of the larger…
Well, this has turned out to be more fun that i thought. Starting off, I agree that everyone will one day die, but I don't believe sinning will expedite that process. If atheists are correct, that there is no God, then the sin of disbelief will make no difference. If you're…
568.
Atheism is a more reasonable position than theism
For
I do own the burden of proof to establish that atheism is a more reasonable position (a position more based on [good] reason) than theism. One way to achieve that would be to establish for certain that God does not exist. It will surprise nobody that I am not about to do that;…
Hot on the heels of a frustrating debate with vi_spex, which I liken to wrestling a hagfish, Pfalcon has kindly agreed to debate me on this subject; having looked at a couple of his earlier debates, I am looking forward to engaging with an intelligent human being who evidently…
Against
Poor Analogies PRO begins by drawing an analogy between this debate and a debate on the reasonability of belief in the Yeti. This analogy is unsuccessful, for two main reasons. 1. The Yeti doesn't have the level of explanatory power that God would have, provided God exists. a.…
I graciously accept AndyHood's challenge. I'm hoping this will be an enlightening and engaging exchange. Burden of Proof Majority of the Burden of Proof rests upon PRO to establish that "Atheism is a more reasonable position than theism". Positive arguments must be provided by…
569.
Anarcho-capitalism would lead to despotic statism
For
1. Humans do not form hierarchies because they are forced to, but because it is necessary. A world where everyone is equal is the world of dreams. And most people require leadership because in times of problems, they cannot make decisions for themselves. This is why people that…
1. Working for a boss does not create obedient habits of mind, it creates a clear chain of command and authority, something that is as natural as breathing. Even in the wild, animals require leadership, thus the existence of an alpha male. 2. Capital comes into the hands of…
Against
1. Humans do not form hierarchies because they are forced to, but because it is necessary. A world where everyone is equal is the world of dreams. And most people require leadership because in times of problems, they cannot make decisions for themselves. This is why people that…
1. Working for a boss does not create obedient habits of mind, it creates a clear chain of command and authority, something that is as natural as breathing. Even in the wild, animals require leadership, thus the existence of an alpha male. 2. Capital comes into the hands of…
570.
Religion has contributed more to science than atheism will
For
I am pro because religion,particularly the "most violent"Islam and Roman Catholicism. Islam layed the groundwork for mathematics and muslims gave us some of the best astronomers,as well as the founder of chemistry. scientists such as Galileo,Corpernicus,Descartes,…
Against
I extend my arguments.
I extend my arguments.
571.
Arguments for an all-knowing creator god are illogical
For
Well, it appears that my opponent, for whatever reason, has decided to argue in favour of my position. Extend both my opponent's and my own arguments.
Any argument for the existence of an infinitely-intelligent, creator god, is illogical I'm going to make simple arguments to begin. Any justification for the existence of an infinitely-intelligent, creator god must have the following two components: He is infinitely-intelligent…
Against
I would like to point out, if god was so smart, why did he give humans a choice on whether to be evil or not. Why did he give us the power to kill each other in masses, if he was so smart, why isn't he stopping global warming, if he can change all of this why doesn't he do it?…
I don't believe in a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, who had unlimited power, I look forward to this debate.
572.
God is present everywhere
For
I will conclude this debate by thanking, The Russian, for his participation. I am not promoting God or asking anyone to agree with me. If I were to be truthful, I feel that The Russian's last submission was just 'more of the same. Let me show you why I say this.Free Will is for…
The Russian states 'An atheist is one who claims that there is no God.''Hi The Russian and thanks again for your participation. Here is what Wik states'Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection…
Against
I don't think I have much more to say. ". .. gardeners see God, climbers see God, soldiers see God. .. " But I don't. I was hoping for a more logic based argument, but indeed I think my opponent's arguments can essentially be boiled down to: 1) People have always believed 2)…
"The Russian's proposal that God belief was established as a form of delusional 'comforting' is a very weak argument." My opponent calls my argument weak, but I didn't really see any effective counters to it. He says that modern religions are clearly wrong, and I'm not…
573.
Science is a religion because it relies on belief
For
I don't have beleifs, I know my experience of now kNow=now belief=be lie, as i don't know is true belief is nothing, and know is something. I cant believe in reality, and I cant know imagination, as know is true and imagination is false belief=acceptance that information is…
I have no beliefs belief=be lie kNow=now if I don't have to imagine it, I know it what are you most certain off, what you neighbor is doing, or that you are reading these words? am I holding a rock in my hand? you have to imagine it I don't know is a position of know, and know…
Against
I'm sorry to miss the last round, got tied up with work and just never made it back in time to post an argument. It appears that my opponent is claiming that the only thing that can be known is immediate experience and consequently everything other than that is false or a lie,…
My opponent begins by stating that he has no beliefs, which itself is a belief, so it is a self-negating statement. He then restates two of his word equations which appear to be an attempt to make some kind of point but are not the least bit accurate. He says "belief=be lie"…
574.
Divine omniscience is incompatible with human free will
For
"This is a debate site. Your supposed to post long arguments with sources and stuff." There is no set format on how a debate is to be set up. "Your pathetic argument doesn't even deserve a response." There is a conduct vote. I see your new to the site so it is understandable if…
Good luck to you as well. My argument will be short and simple. If there exists an omniscient god then it knows everything that anyone will ever do. Let's say it knows that I will spill my soda. It would have known this since the beginning of time. So, I would have always been…
Against
"There is a conduct vote. I see your new to the site so it is understandable if you did not know. I will advise you from now on to act a little more civil." I'm not trying to win the conduct vote. Im trying to win the argument! it doesnt mater if you hav better conduct if you…
"My argument will be short and simple." This is a debate site. Your supposed to post long arguments with sources and stuff. Your pathetic argument doesn't even deserve a response. But I'll try anyway. god supposedly exists outside of the laws of logic. Cause he creeted the lows…
575.
War is never morally justifiable
For
I know that there is terrorism, but I also think there are other ways to solve that problem. We have great offense [if I can put it that way], but what if we made better defense? I said "giving up" instead of "surrendering", it's not a big deal. If you know what I meant, then…
I'm not going to be judgemental or factual at all about this. This is all about opinion. =) I hate war. There are so many different ways of settling arguments rather than going into a huge war killing hundreds, thousands, millions of people for the stupidest reasons. You know…
Against
"I know that there is terrorism, but I also think there are other ways to solve that problem. We have great offense [if I can put it that way], but what if we made better defense?" First off, war is not "offense/ defense." Explain to me how there are offense/ defense sides.…
:) "I'm not going to be judgemental or factual at all about this. This is all about opinion. " About opinion? Debate is all about provided facts, reasons, and refuting what your opponent says while trying to prove their point. But anyways onto the debate. .. "I hate war. There…
576.
God's existence is necessary for objective morality
For
I truly believe in what my argument will be and I always enjoy it when others try and refute my beliefs, as it forces me to think about my beliefs even harder. I will abide by my opponent's request for no semantics, cheap shots, or foul play, so long as he does as well.…
I will cordon off the arguments into the areas my opponent argued in this round, with perhaps some more subsections in the longer material. DEFINITIONS On the definition debate, my opponent in the last round quoted me then posted one sentence. This sentence wasn't even a…
Against
Resolution and what this debate is aboutPro says "This shows that the real issue at hand is the existence of objective morality and how it is existent even if God doesn't exist. "I think I should clarify something, the resolution doesn't state that objective morality exists, it…
ResolutionThe existence of God is necessary for objective morality to existBurden of ProofPro will affirm the resolutionCon will oppose the resolutionDebate details4 Rounds8,000 Character limit72 Hours to respond1 Month voting periodNO VIDEO…
577.
Atheism is as illogical as theism regarding the origin of the universe
For
YES BUT THEY ARE BOTH AS BAD AS EACH OTHER at distinguishing the truth!
Regardless of them being logical, they are EQUALLY ILLOGICAL (TO EACH OTHER!)
Against
They cannot possibly be both equally illogical because if one theory p and other not-p, even if neither can prove one or the other proposition to satisfaction of the other theory, one or the other proposition is true. Truth must be distinguished being warranted affirms.
They are not illogical. X goes to Y and Y goes X. Is mathematics loop illogical? Side A: The other side of the paper is correct. Side B: The other side of paper is incorrect.
578.
The stone paradox is a valid paradox against the Biblical God
For
Thank you for showing superb conduct throughout this debate. I have enjoyed this debate greatly and, in fact, changed some of my views as a result of the debate. To close, I have argued that the paradox of the stone is a valid paradox as it forces God to admit that there is…
Thank you, ReformedArsenal, for your quick reply. Allow me to begin with this illustration, if you do not mind: (please forgive me if this offends anyone). Now, onto the debate. My opponent's arguments boils down to the following:1) Nothing is impossible for God2) Illogical…
Against
ResponseMy opponent points out that if we limit God's omnipotence to logical actions, that creating an object that is so heavy that he cannot lift it is logical. However, this is not the case. By definition, an object that is so heavy that an omnipotent being cannot lift it…
I agree with his statement that the definition of omnipotence must be rooted squarely in the Scripture and applaud the passages chosen. What is Omnipotence? (. http://en.wikipedia.org...)When asked this question, most people willl answer "the ability to do anything. " Now, if…
579.
Without God, morality cannot be objective
For
I won't press it further but posting your argument isn't considered an acceptance round. My opponent further argues that morality is objective. There is no rebuttal to my argument. Extend my arguments.
My opponent gives an example as to why morality is objective. What my opponent needs to do is argue that objective morality isn't contingent upon God's existence. I am arguing that since objective morality is true, God must exist. God is defined as the arbiter of humanity and…
Against
ok, creation is a construct, machines are constructs, nature is the opposite of machine
that is acceptance god is subjective, morality is objective, like math.. are you arguing that we should eat the rotten apples to stay healthy? so you argue it is moral to feed your kids deadly poisonous mushroom to keep them healthy if god says so so eat rotten food the rest of…
580.
Pascal's Wager is not a convincing reason to believe in God
For
Con has lost this round in a spectacular fashion. There are several reasons, prima facie, that this is the case. 1) He has not offered a single argument (read: NOT ONE) as to why Pascal's Wager is convincing. In fact, he claims that something else does the convincing, which is…
Con does not really say anything here, so bear with me, floor. This is going to be difficult. A few notes:1) The rules I presented, and Con agreed to, require Round 2 to be solely constructive material, with no rebuttals. Con ignores this, which is grounds for the awarding of…
Against
I give it to Pro...
"Firstly, Con's job is to show why the Wager is convincing. But more importantly, this argument was presented to show that Pascal's Wager treats the two options as semi-equals erroneously. If I can show that the probability of a God existing is low, then one half of Pascal's…
581.
Objective morality requires a supreme being or deity
For
Although I can understand your reasoning, I am still in disagreement. Here's why: Although society may be able to set socially subjective standards for morality, they cannot define objective morality. The reason for this is because objectivity applies to EVERYONE and not just…
The question of morality is one that is commonly debated within society. Homosexuality and abortion are but a few examples of commonly discussed moral issues. I would like to argue that without the institution of a God or at least some form of supreme deity with moral authority…
Against
Shibirish baba
I pass the turn
582.
Atheism requires a form of systematic faith
For
The problem is that I called it systematic?Not a big deal! It is in fact an advantage for your side. See,Systematic: presented or formulated as a coherent body of ideas or principles ; methodical in procedure or plan . Retrieved from Merriam-Webster Dictionary. In what system…
To which position should I reply?You started from scratch by stating, «Definitions of faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something».But you ended by denying countering yourself« trusting something is not the same as "tremendous faith» (of course not, because…
Against
------------------------------------ I've pointed out the following: 1) Atheism is a LACK of BELIEF (in gods) because there is no clear and compelling evidence. 2) It is not possible to have full confidence in a system. We're predisposed to SKEPTICISM. 3) Individual beliefs…
To which position should I reply? You started from scratch by stating, "Definitions of faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something". But you ended by denying countering yourself" trusting something is not the same as "tremendous faith" (of course not, because…
583.
The Kalam cosmological argument proves God exists
For
Closing ArgumentsI have clearly shown in this debate how Con's assertions regarding the KCA are baseless and in fact, irrelevant and not legitimate objections to the argument. I will simply reinforce them and not add any new arguments this round, as Con would not have a chance…
InVinoVeritas still has not leveled a legitimate objection to the KCA.The KCA does not "beg the question." It is part of a series of arguments that form a cumulative case for the existence of God. For example, the KCA does not prove which God exists, only that the existence of…
Against
CLOSING STATEMENTS:Objection I: The opponent does not any valid reason that God is timeless and is the exception to the cause-effect rule that the KCA establishes for itself. He states that God's timelessness can be proven by other arguments, but he would rather not argue them…
The opponent states that "InVinoVeritas does not understand the Cosmological Argument." On the contrary, not only do I understand the argument, but I also understand the fallacies on which the argument is founded, and this "understanding" is what I am trying to get across in…
584.
A creator of the universe exists
For
I too believe a creators existence can not be proven. I believe the creator specifically designed it that way for a reason. As to the reason, it calls for speculation on my part and therefore I will not mention it. So true there is no priori proof of a creators existence yet…
I propose a challenge consisting of continuous 5 round debates until we reach an impass. Or until one of us concede. Nothing will be deemed as fact unless both parties agree. If Con wishes to alter anything it must be done in comments, prior to accepting. I wish my opponent…
Against
I will begin with a brief opening, with background: Humans are creatures of curiosity and, throughout their written history, have searched for answers to events, phenomena, and physical observations that incite the curiosity of the species. To our knowledge (that we are able to…
Sifting through all of the inapplicable tangents, the veiled accusations, and the ad hominem effluvia, I was not able to discern a single valid argument, and just a handful of valid statements. From the beginning: Pro: "Evidence is not proof? Lol what dictionary do you own? The…
585.
It is more reasonable to believe in God than not
For
Regarding the religions currently in existence, there is no lack of information concerning their founders, their holy books, etc. But if we go back far enough, we will eventually face the question, how did religion begin? Evidently, to find the answer we must look beyond the…
After my research on the origin of religion and considering how God reveals his power in his word the Bible, I have come to the conclusion that it is more reasonable to believe in God rather than not to. First round is acceptance only. In the second round we will each have…
Against
God - a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity. Atheist - a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
This argument will be about Christianity, as that is the thing you have used in your debate area the whole time. A better name for the debate should have been about Christianity instead of just "God." Also, I am not able to use fonts, sizes, or other properties to my text…
586.
Belief in free will is less rational than young Earth creationism
For
Well you're using a straw man argument, I'm not arguing exactly that young Earth Creationism is true, just that it's more rational than believing in free-will. I want the atheist-controlled media to attack free-will believers like how they've attacked Creationism. The reason…
The atheist-controlled or anti-religious media has come out to attack Creationism, but not free-will believers even though based on modern science free-will is much more of an irrational belief than denying evolution or the arguments young Earth Creationists use. The reason why…
Against
I accept.YEC- the religious belief that the Universe, Earth and all life on Earth were created by direct acts of God between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago, as described in the Biblical story of Genesis.Free Will- the ability to exercise conscious control over one's own actions In…
Thanks to itsnobody for the debate. It's been fun. I'll just use this round address Pro's relevant points from each contention. C1) -- Pro ignores my explanation of how neither of the free will models I have presented deny that determinism holds true on large scales. -- Pro has…
587.
Atheism is morally bankrupt
For
My Position is that Atheism is morally bankrupt. It is unable to lay a foundation for morality and in fact has positive inducements for evil. This will be strictly philosophical no use of historical examples or personal experience will be used, as interesting as such topics are…
He completely ignored my epistemological arguments of self-performative incoherence of atheism or with the argument presented by de Sade, Nietzsche or Max Stirner. Some things have been helpfully clarified; unfortunately we have only one more response to cut between the fog.…
Against
(i) The Debate Understood A number of problems arise just looking at the presentation of Pro's case. The first and perhaps most notable is his mistake of not defining the terms at hand. The question to be asked when we are faced with a proposition such as "Atheism is morally…
, we still must fault him for not furthering his case in a fashion that clarifies what he says in his original opening statements. As I said in my previous rebuttal: "Pro has not adequately presented a case that would establish the above proposition: 'Atheism is morally…
588.
Science and religion are two ways of telling the same story
For
I'm neutral in the argument
Against
I win on the account of Pro never meeting his/her BoP, PLUS my negative case arguments pushed the debate further in my favour. 500 characters was hard to work with, but it was a good test!
A1: The ability to changeThrough tests, experiments and studies, science may alter or add to existing knowledge. This does not happen within religion. Once the religious doctrines/knowledge have been finalised, the doctrines/knowledge will not be changed. For example, Islam has…

How to use these debate topics

Vote, discuss, revote. Poll the room on the motion, give 5 minutes of discussion, then vote again and look at who changed their mind.
Four corners. Label corners strongly agree → strongly disagree; people move, then each corner makes its best case.
Switch sides. Halfway through, everyone argues the side they disagree with. It sharpens listening.

Run them live

Want every person to answer on their own phone, with a timer and a live leaderboard? Use these questions in an EngageSlide Vote · Discuss · Revote — free to start.

Tick questions on any page — your set is kept while you browse (or take the first 10 here) — and they become ready-to-play slides. What is EngageSlide?

Philosophy Debate Topics — page 12

How to use these debate topics

Run them live

More question collections