Which side makes a better case?
avatar
5 Comments
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 2 years ago

    Ya I get a lot of accepted challenges, and then no follow-up when I prompt for a time. I then re-cycle them after a second prompt gets no reply.

    • 2 years ago

      Interesting how @debateme13 works into his central thesis agaisnt the resolution. I didn't expect him to make an argument based on Pro's worldview. That is a pretty powerful way to do this.

      Nelly is, however, trying to say that under an Atheist worldview, Atheists don't have morals, as where Con's argument is that under the theist worldview, Atheists have morals.

      That may be the hard part of these discussions. Do we...
      1. Examine how morality works entirely within a given worldview
      2. Examine how morality is viewed between two worldviews
      3. Examine how one sides morality operates within the other's worldview.

      Each will give you a different look at this. Con is using #3 Pro seems to be doing #2 here.

      • 2 years ago

        Better != Perfect. Better is always relative to the status quo, not to some imagined future state.

        For instance, people used to poop in the streets. People came to see this as a real problem to be solved. They (society) decides to make a law, "No pooping in the streets, and no putting your poop in the streets."

        We deem this to be "better" however, that says nothing about how people poop in a "perfect" world. We might imagine not-pooping at all would be perfect, but it's not a goal anyone is entertaining in any serious way.

        • 2 years ago

          Here is the central assumption Pro is making in the latter half of the debate.

          Just because I am my moral lawgiver, and joe is joe's moral lawgiver, that does not mean I have to respect Joe's laws, especially not when Joe's morals involve stealing from me. I'll just punch Joe in the face until he stops stealing from me. And I'll take back my stuff. In short, Fuck Joe's crappy morals.

          In a society, we get together to agree on common morals that we all decide to enforce and uphold. When people try to break them, we collectively punch them in the face.

          It's as simple as that.

          Nelson seems to think that Atheists have to respect other people's morals, they don't.

          • 2 years ago

            I liked this debate, fun to listen to and @nellyj_misesian made good arguments for his possition. Needless to say, convincing me I have no morals is a pretty hard thing to do. :)