Atheism Is a Religion
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Pro will defend "Atheism is a religion." Con will defend "Atheism is not a religion." Definitions will be included in my opening Round
Con will defend "Atheism is not a religion."
- Any instances, which are appropriately being classified as atheism yet are not appropriately classified as religion, exists soundly intrinsic structurally.
- Some attribute within Atheism as a whole, and therefore all the instances of atheism, makes atheism and religion mutually exclusive ideas, therefore being both is never possible.
a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
- "All political positions involves the position holders being political"
- No, apoliticism is a position on politics, with apoliticals not being political, obviously
- "All personal social positions involve being social"
- No, I can be a total recluse from even online information, living by myself farming far away, that is a position socially.
- "All positions on driving must involve driving"
- No, my position on driving is that I don't drive. Simple as that. I hold no organized or institutionalized set of instincts or beliefs on "how to drive", because I think the best way on this issue as of yet is to NOT drive
- "All positions on China must be pro-China"
- Although I am not, anyone can be anti-China. Maybe you think this one is structured a little differently, however, this specific thing is exactly the same with "All religious positions must be pro-religion/religious", thus mistakenly classifying Atheism as a religion. Without any other arguments on why atheism is a religion, this argument on why atheism is a religion makes no sense.
Religious - “relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality…”3
Disbelief definition, the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true.
- "Any instances, which are appropriately being classified as atheism yet are not appropriately classified as religion, exists soundly intrinsic structurally."
- For babies unable to believe in any kind of God or even just anything supernatural, obviously, they don't classify as "religious", which means that such instances do exist.
- "Some attribute within Atheism as a whole, and therefore all the instances of atheism, makes atheism and religion mutually exclusive ideas, therefore being both is never possible."
- Atheism is not religious, so Atheism is not a religion.
- The conditions according to the statements shown above in quote marks of the same rank as this one, are being met by CON. Vote CON.
Let's start with an analogy: What do all non-smokers have in common, removing that they don't smoke? The answer is: Not necessarily anything. I am a non-smoker(And if you really want to doubt it, assume I really am one), Hitler once was one, and my aunt's dog or my friend's cousin's cat didn't smoke either because smoking animals outside humans are rare.
And my position here is simple: Because some atheists believe in nothing at all(such as babies, and they don't believe in anything, yes, including anything religious), there is no system of beliefs that truly captures all forms of atheism. And yes, Babies are unable to believe in God, or anything, due to physiological reasons.
- For babies unable to believe in any kind of God or even just anything supernatural, obviously, they don't classify as "religious", which means that such instances do exist.
they don't classify as "religious"
There is, frankly, no obligation for "faithful devotion" among atheists. All one needs to be an atheist is to not believe in the existence of any God, not to be devoted faithfully to any non-god entity. I believe Pro is mistakenly thinking that "all religious positions involve being religious", and such claims can be disproven using, such as:
- "All political positions involves the position holders being political"
- No, apoliticism is a position on politics, with apoliticals not being political, obviously
- "All personal social positions involve being social"
- No, I can be a total recluse from even online information, living by myself farming far away, that is a position socially.
- "All positions on driving must involve driving"
- No, my position on driving is that I don't drive. Simple as that. I hold no organized or institutionalized set of instincts or beliefs on "how to drive", because I think the best way on this issue as of yet is to NOT drive
- "All positions on China must be pro-China"
- Although I am not, anyone can be anti-China. Maybe you think this one is structured a little differently, however, this specific thing is exactly the same with "All religious positions must be pro-religion/religious", thus mistakenly classifying Atheism as a religion. Without any other arguments on why atheism is a religion, this argument on why atheism is a religion makes no sense.
I believe Pro is mistakenly thinking that "all religious positions involve being religious"
"I don’t want to continue anymore. Just take the win." - Intelligence_06
While this is a concession, I want to make a few comments on the arguments. I believe in the truest sense, that atheism is a belief system. An aetheist believes the universe exists and operates without a god(s). However CON made a great point, that could have been very interesting if they had stretched it out, that being "Any instances, which are appropriately being classified as atheism yet are not appropriately classified as a religion, exists soundly intrinsic structurally." An argument could be made that an agnostic atheist falls into that classification. Con's arguments were starting to be persuasive. Pro did a great job rebutting some of them.
"Could I debate you on this same subject?"
Yeah, we can do that. By the way, do you read your PMs? If you personally do not want to reply, then I understand. No anger towards you
Could I debate you on this same subject?
Oh god, this is terrible performance. Well, guess that is what you get when you forget it for a week and later type this up when the mister in the English class thinks you are typing his essay assignment.
this be a truism matey!
Yeah, I think you’re right.
Is it just me or has the font size shrunk by one increment?
I want to. Intelligence_06 has priority because they accepted first. If I think I have enough time for two, I'll make another for us
"Rember that the definition of religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods."
It is true that this is a definition of religion. It is not "the definition" though
Rember that the definition of religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods.
Can you challenge me to another debate on the same subject?
One of the Furious Five has accepted