Instigator / Pro
0
1525
rating
23
debates
58.7%
won
Topic
#5035

Is god real?

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
0
Better sources
0
0
Better legibility
0
0
Better conduct
0
0

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Rated
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
20,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Minimal rating
None
Contender / Con
0
1328
rating
262
debates
41.22%
won
Description

In this debate the 2 contenders will debate over if god is real
con - god isn't real
pro - god is real

Round 1
Pro
#1
Im going to copy & paste the argument from our previous argument (and ill add all the extra premises I excluded as well

But 1st lets define god:
a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity:

The unmoved mover
Premise 1: change is real

Premise 2: change is the actualization of a potential

Premise 3: therefore the actualization of a potential is real

Premise 4: The actualization of a potential can only be caused by some other actuality (principle of causality)

Premise 5: the other actuality must either be actual (underived) or must itself go from potential to actual (derived) in order to actualize another

Premise 6: therefore there is either that which is already actual or this other actuality must be
Actualized by yet another which is per se responsible for its actualization 

Premise 7: therefore, there is either that whose being is already actual or there is an infinite hierarchical (essentially ordered) series of actualized actualizers

Premise 8: but an infinite hierarchical series of actualized actualizers and things is impossible
This is because each member of this series depends on the actualized actualizer that actualized it, simply put an infinite amount of events doesn’t remove or deny the conclusion

Conclusion: Therefore, there must be that whose very being is already actual and does not go from potential to actual in any way: an unactualized actualizer

Tanscendental
Premise 10: whatever has an essence distinct from its existence must be caused or actualized to exist

Premise 11: but the unactualized actualizer is not actualized

Premise 12: therefore the unactualized actualizer must have an essence which just is it’s existence: what is is actuality, simply put 

Premise 13: whatever is composite in being must be actualized to exist as a composite being

Premise 14: therefore, the unactualized actualizer must have non-composite, or simple, being

Premise 15: but the sun total of physical reality or finite realities is not simple being

 premise 16: therefore, whatever is simple being cannot be identified with the totality of finite realities

Premise 17: but to not be identified with the totality of finite realities is just to be transcendent

Conclusion: therefore the unactualized actualizer is transcendent 

Without succession

Premise 19: whatever has an essence which just is it’s existence must necessarily be

Premise 20: therefore the unactualized  actualizer must necessarily be

Premise 21: whatever has necessary being does not being to exist or cease to exisr

Premise 22: therefore the unactualized actualizer does not begin to exist or cease to exist

Premise 23: to change requires having potentialities

Premise 24: but that whose essence is it’s existence has no potentialities

Premise 25: therefore the unactualized actualizer must be immutable

Premise 26: to be immutable entails being without succession 

Conclusion: therefore, unactualized actualizer is without succession 

Omnipotent

Premise 28: to have a power is to be able to make something happen and communicate being to another

Premise 29: but that which is subsistence existence itself can communicate any being since it just is actual being 

Premise 30:but to be able to communicate any being whatsoever is just to be omnipotent

Conclusion: therefore the actualized actualizer is omnipotent

Immaterial 

Premise 32: whatever is material being is composite being

premise 33: therefore, whatever is simple being must be immaterial

Conclusion: therefore the actual actualizer is immaterial 

Eliminating polytheism
This section isn’t needed to make the argument work but I’ll include it

Premise 35: if there were more than one thing whose being is simple, then they would have to differ in atleast one respect, which entails having a part another has not and thus composite, I.e not-simple

Premise 36: Therefore, the assumption that there is more than one simple being leads to contradiction

Premise 37: therefore, there is only one simple being

Premise 38: therefore there is only one unactualized actualizer

Conclusion: Therefore, the unactualized actualizer is the universal cause of being.

Omnipresent 

Premise 40: A cause must be present, in some way, to it’s effect

Premise 41: So, the cause of something’s existence must be present to it in some way, otherwise it would not exist

Premise 42: But the unactualized actualizer is the universal cause of being

Conclusion: therefore the unactualized actualizer is present to all things, hence omnipresent

Perfection
Premise 44: To be further perfectible entails having some potentialities awaiting actualization

Premise 45: Therefore, whatever has no potentialities cannot be further perfected

conclusion: Therefore, the unactualized actualizer is perfect

Good

Premise 47: Something is good in proportion to its perfectly being what it is according to its nature

Premise 48: But the unactualized actualizer perfectly is subsistent existence itself

Conclusion: Therefore the unactualized actualizer is good, simply put.

Personal

Premise 50: To be personal is to have a certain power

Premise 51: Therefore, whatever is omnipotent is also personal

Premise 52: Therefore the unactualized actualizer is personal

Intellect

Premise 53: Whatever is in the effect must, in some way be in the cause

Premise 54: There are universal patterns or forms in the world,  as effects of the unactualized actualizer

Premise 55: Therefore, the unactualized actualizer contains all these forms in some way

Premise 56: But, the unactualized actualizer, being subsistent existence itself, is not an instantiation of any particular form

Premise 57: But to contain form without being an instance of that form is just have intellect

Conclusion: Therefore, the unactualized actualizer has intellect

Omniscient

Premise 59: But to have intellect and also be the universal cause of being is just to be omniscient

Conclusion: Therefore the unactualized actualizer is omniscient

Truthful

Premise 61: Intellect is perfected to the degree that it has truth

Premise 62: Therefore, whatever is perfect and has intellect must perfectly possess truth.

Conclusion: Therefore, the unactualized actualizer possesses truth.

Life

Premise 64: The unactualized actualizer is perfect with or without having caused anything else to be

Premise 65: But an intellect which causes things to be which it does not need is free with respect to what it causes to be in particular and wheter anything else is cause to be at all

Premise 66: But this implies the unactualized actualizer has (free) will/volition/rational appetite by analogy

Premise 67:If something does not have life, it cannot have intellect or will (in the sense of rational appetite)

Premise 68: But the unactualized actualizer has both intellect and will

conclusion: Therefore the unactualized actualizer has a life

Eternal

Premise 70: To be immutable, without succession, perfect, and have life is just to be eternal.

Premise 71: Therefore the unactualized actualizer is eternal

Conclusion:

Premise 72: Therefore the unactualized actualizer is subsistent existence itself, simple, one, transcendent, immaterial, has necessary being, immutable, without succession, omnipotent, personal, omnipresent, perfect, simply good, has intellect, omniscient, has truth, has will, has life, eternal.

Premise 73: But this is just to say that god exists

Premise 74: Therefore god exists
Con
#2
God would have to be all powerful, therefore smart.

This world is designed poorly, in a not so smart way.

So I think that this world is a product  of an evil demon, not God.

Anyway, let us know what you think.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Well how do we know it’s poorly designed? 

Also perhaps this helps us prove god, because where would this since of objective bad come from? I couldn’t explain it without reference to God. Which it’s also odd because you reject a objective sense of morality.
Con
#4
I have eyes.
Round 3
Pro
#5
Okay but how does this object to that it helps us prove god, your saying this world was badly designed where did you get that objective sense of bad?

The theist could also simply explain god created it good and it was corrupted by Adam & Eve 

This universe is actually quite intelligently designed to permit us to live here

1 - If the initial explosion of the big bang had differed in strength by as little as 1 part in 10^60, the universe would have either quickly collapsed back on itself, or expanded too rapidly for stars to form. In either case, life would be impossible.

2 - Calculations by Brandon Carter show that if gravity had been stronger or weaker by 1 part in 10^40, then life-sustaining stars like the sun could not exist. This would most likely make life impossible.

Source: THE FINE-TUNING DESIGN ARGUMENT By Robin Collins From Reason for the Hope Within (1999)

Con
#6
I dont understand what you are saying, but anway...

bad world = bad demon.

Seems simple enough.

Now bad God doesnt sound right because God is supposed to be smart. So why isnt he? Because he doesnt exist.

This world is bad, so it could have only been created by bad demon.

Well, there are good demons too who are trying to fix the world and help humans.
Round 4
Pro
#7
Your saying this world is bad, where did this objective sense of bad come from? It is intellectually dishonest of you since you deny objective morality.

bad world = bad demon.

Seems simple enough.
Not really, I could simply argue
bad world = bad people 

Now bad God doesnt sound right because God is supposed to be smart. So why isnt he? Because he doesnt exist.
Okay you haven’t proved god isn’t smart yet, and haven’t even tried attacking my argument for his existence

This world is bad, so it could have only been created by bad demon.
Again this doesn’t help your case, it helps mine because we can’t explain objective morality without god. 

And again I could simply argue it’s bad because people corrupted it

Well, there are good demons too who are trying to fix the world and help humans.
Is there even a such thing as a good demon?

Con
#8
Lucifer is a good demon. He fights against evil demons who created this world.

I pray to Lucifer often. I think it helps me in life. Plus, pleasure is everything in the world of pain, and Lucifer stands for pleasure.

Indulgence, not abstinence... although I practice both. Its good.
Round 5
Pro
#9
Lucifer is a good demon. He fights against evil demons who created this world.
Lucifer killed 10 people in the Bible, that’s not very good.

You may say that god killed more but that’s because he has the right to where Lucifer doesn’t, it’s like how a artist can judge his painting.

I pray to Lucifer often. I think it helps me in life. Plus, pleasure is everything in the world of pain, and Lucifer stands for pleasure.
Have you tried praying to god? Lucifer isn’t going to help with anything


Con
#10
I did pray to Jesus before, but then I converted to demon worshipping.