CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
37
Yes No
Debate Score:48
Arguments:44
Total Votes:54
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (10)
 
 No (26)

Debate Creator

nomeansno(49) pic



Is God real?

What makes you think so?

I think there is no real way to prove either point.

Yes

Side Score: 11
VS.

No

Side Score: 37
0 points

A simple answer is yes.

These kinds of things come from opinion, so I feel just because something like that hasn't been recognized by science does not mean it's not real.

It also depends on the way you percieve God. If I were to say "God" is simply us and our consciousness, could that be proven easier? Yes.

We always make things more complicated than they are, considering we are humans and we seek hope, truth and knowledge

Side: Yes
zephyr20x6(2387) Disputed
3 points

A simple answer is yes. These kinds of things come from opinion, so I feel just because something like that hasn't been recognized by science does not mean it's not real.

What reason is there to think god does exist though? Anything can be an opinion, I can have the opinion that 2 + 2 = 5, the question isn't if gods existence isn't an opinion or not, but if it is a correct opinion.

It also depends on the way you percieve God. If I were to say "God" is simply us and our consciousness, could that be proven easier? Yes.

True, however why call what already has a word for it god? Is conciousness not enough?

We always make things more complicated than they are, considering we are humans and we seek hope, truth and knowledge

The biggest thing humans seek, all humans. Comfort is a form of happiness and that is what a belief in god offers.

Side: No
Kittiana(154) Clarified
1 point

Very true, that. I think a new-ager, such as myself would typically just acknowledge the existence of a source/Creator because we believe in oneness, and if we all realized that, God would have proven itself. A ridiculous notion to most, but a paradox. ^_^''

Side: Yes
0 points

There are deductive arguments that prove God's existence. Logically, a priori, God is the only thing to believe in. Empirically, a posteriori, there is evidence to support God being the only reasonable thing to believe in.

Side: Yes
Jace(5188) Disputed
2 points

No there are not. You just used a couple of Latin phrases to make you sound intelligent. This is what you actually said:

1. "Logically, from what came before, God is the only thing to believe in." Effectively, stuff happened before so God. That is an assumption, not logical. Just because we do not have complete scientific understanding does not make the most readily available belief true.

2. "Empirically, from what came after, there is evidence to support God." Effectively, stuff happened later so God. That is also an assumption, not empirical proof.

If you are going to claim logic and empiricism then you are actually going to have to go to the effort of developing your argument, actually using both logic and empiric evidence. I do not anticipate that such proof will be forthcoming.

Side: No
Banana_Slug(845) Disputed
1 point

There is no evidence for god. That's why you need to have faith & rituals as substitutions for it.

Side: No
3 points

I don't believe there is a god, I can't prove god doesn't exist however there still isn't a reason to believe in the first place. I can't disprove unicorns, and the statement "unicorns don't exist" is unbacked technically, howeverI don't believe unicorns don't exist as to ponder the question if they don't exist is silly since I have no reason to ponder that unicorns do exist in the first place.

Side: No
3 points

1. There is absolutely not a single factual or rational basis for thinking that god is real.

2. There is a significant body of research (behavioral genetic, neurobioligical, psychological) which indicates that God is a construct of the human mind. Studies have found that: (a) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (b) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (c) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (d) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels.

Therefore: Lacking even minimal reason to believe that God is real and possessing ample evidence that God is a human construct, we can disprove the existence of God by explaining the origin of the idea of God as a byproduct of human imagination.

Side: No

we can disprove the existence of God by explaining the origin of the idea of God as a byproduct of human imagination.

I never looked at it that way either, though I would suspect at least some theists to say something along the lines "just because the idea is based on pure imagiation doesn't mean it is disproven". I think if religion wasn't so ingrained in our biology and society, they wouldn't be this defensive over the belief, as I find so many counter-arguments to be that of mental jumping jacks. Or a better way to put it, over-complicating the whole issue with inside ones head to make their beliefs make more sense to them.

Side: No
Jace(5188) Clarified
1 point

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. Being able to prove something true and being able to convince people of that truth are too frequently separate things. Most theists would dismiss the research with some non-defensible response along the lines of god giving us that imagination. Which is again the same conundrum of proof versus no proof.

Side: Yes
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
1 point

1) Sure there is.

2) This has no bering on whether God exists or not. Simply because there is a psychological component to imagine God does not negate God's existence. If anything it proves it.

------

You cannot disprove God with those premises.

Side: Yes
Jace(5188) Disputed
1 point

Called it.

1. No, there absolutely is not. Not a single theist ever has presented any actual evidence to support their beliefs. If you are going to come back on this point again, then bring your purported proof with you. Assertions do not an argument or evidence make.

2. Yes, it absolutely does. The research indicates that god is a construct of the human mind that was evolutionary selected for as a coping mechanism. It provides an explanation for an otherwise inexplicably pervasive belief in something for which there is no proof. How on earth does that explanation prove that god exists? If you are going the "god clearly gave us this imagination route" then (a) you have no proof or sound scientific reasoning to justify that claim whereas evolutionary theory is sound; and (b) you have to explain why a god(s) would then create so many different imaginations of god(s) and cause all of the strife that there is on account of those disparate beliefs.

3. Sorry to say, but I just did. Or at the very least I gave considerably more proof than the theist side of this debate ever has.

Side: No
2 points

God is as real as unicorns, fairies, Santa Claus, Shrek, Gandalf...

Side: No

I don't believe there is a god, I can't prove god doesn't exist however there still isn't a reason to believe in the first place. I can't disprove unicorns, and the statement "unicorns don't exist" is unbacked technically, howeverI don't believe unicorns don't exist as to ponder the question if they don't exist is silly since I have no reason to ponder that unicorns do exist in the first place.

Side: No

This is the primary reason I can now comfortably comment that God does not exist. I merely bring up the point that we don't give the same privilege to fairies and other unlikely phenomena, so why God? It's just special pleading.

Side: No

I never looked at it that way, I hold the position of agnostic atheism in an effort of reasoning with the theistic attitude. As an atheist I'd prefer if people left their ungrounded beliefs behind, and I hate taking the time of arguing against the "you can't probe god doesn't exist" argument, of which is ridiculous since we don't apply that logic to most other possible assertions. Though I suppose "special pleading" does apply here, though I still consider myself agnostic since technically we do not know even if it is in the same sense we don't know unicorns exist or not.

Side: No
1 point

No, the only valid belief in yourself. and if there is prove

Side: No