Instigator / Pro
0
1470
rating
31
debates
35.48%
won
Topic

The Concept of God is More Similar than Not Compared to Unknown Information

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Voting points
0
1

With 1 vote and 1 point ahead, the winner is ...

fauxlaw
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Religion
Time for argument
One week
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
1
1684
rating
75
debates
69.33%
won
Description
~ 459 / 5,000

God: the supreme or ultimate reality: such as
a: the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped (as in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism) as creator and ruler of the universe
b: a being or object that is worshipped as having more than natural attributes and powers

Information: knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction

Con: The concept of God is more dissimilar than not to the concept of unknown information

Added:
Contender
--> @Ragnar

thank you for your vote

Added:
--> @gugigor

This might be a concept to take to the forums, to workshop out your thought process into logical proofs.

Added:
Contender

Notice: I would have left this until my frame of R4, but I don't want to mislead anyone, particularly my opponent. In my R3, I made an error of identification in argument X.a.3, which said, "...and Con has said it within his own definition of similarity..." I meant to say that Pro said this.

Added:

annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd forfeit incoming

Added:
Contender

I'm taking the chance that I understand gugigor's premise. Looking forward to a good debate.

Added:

Define unknown and then we talk.

Added:
--> @gugigor

I'm with the others that the wording is a bit confusing. Some clarification might be good

Added:
--> @gugigor

Yeah I'm with MC, I have no idea what're talking about rn.

Added:

Please clarify what exactly is being debated here.

Added:
Contender
--> @gugigor

To clarify my own understanding, your Pro position [BoP] is that the concept of God compares to unknown information, and Con's position [BoP] is that the concept of God compares to known information? If I have the dichotomy of the positions correctly understood, am I correct in the assumption that while Con may present holy writ of whatever source as evidence, you may not consider it as valid sourcing compared to, say, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and it's up to voters to determine which argument/sources are more valid? https://plato.stanford.edu/

Added:
Instigator
--> @Fruit_Inspector @fauxlaw @Theweakeredge

thoughts?