CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.

Start your own community!

Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Enemies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Hostiles
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


RSS Jace

Reward Points:4274
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
95%
Arguments:6118
Debates:14
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

They'd be doing it for themselves...

1 point

It's using idiocy to demonstrate idiocy. The actual argument isn't that evil god exists. It's that the statements one would make in defense of evil god would be the same as for good god, and if those seem indefensible then we should find them equally indefensible when made in defense of good god. It doesn't require that god and evil actually exist (I agree they don't). It's just leveraging a moralizing framework against itself.

1 point

Maybe God has a bad sense of humor. Or the comedy lies in watching the rest of creation respond to such stupidity. ;)

1 point

I actually agree with your conclusion, but not your argument. I think god must be good because "good" is nothing more than personal value backed by conviction. It lacks objective reference, even through a god since no what god does would necessarily be an expression of what god wanted because the god valued it.

I think the problem with your argument, though, is that it presumes that just because god sets the moral standard then god must be a moral god. That doesn't necessarily follow.

1 point

Good is nothing more than an expression of value preference imbued with the force of conviction. Presumably the value and conviction of a god could be surpassed by no one and god would only do what god wanted, so all that god is must be good to god. Including imbuing his creation with a skewed understanding of the good.

2 points

I doth protest!

0 points

No shooting, low entertainment value. Besides, what does America stand for if not a good shooting? Ah... squandered opportunities.

1 point

Pascal's wager is old and tired news... and this is just a weaker form of it.

1 point

The only person I fight for is myself. No Jenner in my bedroom, but I've got the Qotsisajak.

1 point

I read them, in all their puerile profundity. Boredom compelled me to that especially pointless end.

Displaying 10 most recent debates.

Winning Position: Does the sacred have intrinsic value?
Winning Position: Yes
Winning Position: What is the appropriate response to ignorance?
Winning Position: No
Winning Position: Echidna
Winning Position: No

About Me


"More or less an egoist, nihilist, skeptic (not cartesian), determinist."

Biographical Information
Name: Owlman 
Gender: Chap
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Other
Country: United States
Websites: Nihilist Owlman

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here