Instigator / Con
49
1575
rating
5
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#767

Prove that your God is real

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
21
18
Better sources
14
14
Better legibility
7
7
Better conduct
7
0

After 7 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...

vsp2019
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Twelve hours
Max argument characters
6,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
39
1471
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Description

Which God do you believe in and why? Define your god and give me your best reasons for believing.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

conduct to Con for Pro's double forfeit

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

This did not appear to be a debate. The resolution wasn’t well defined - neither side argued for their end of the resolution, and what was argued seemed more an interrogation of one parties personal experience. As such, it was not fully clear how what either pro or con fit into the resolution tarmac ans so it was not possible to weigh the arguments, or individual burden.

As a result I am forced to tie arguments.

Conduct to con for the forfeits.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

"Pro ff 2 rounds which is poor conduct"
- pinkfreud08

I feel the same way about this debate.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro ff 2 rounds which is poor conduct

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Forfeiture.

This honestly felt like a conversation between two people, and not a formal debate to be judged.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con rightfully pointed out that Pro's interpretation of his epiphany could well have been influenced by personal biases and that someone who was primarily surrounded by Muslims may have become deeply attracted to Islam because of a similar experience in a mosque. I also liked Con's reference to possible unconscious influences leading to the behaviour in the church which provides a naturalistic explanation contrary to Pro's supernatural interpretation. Pro tries to rebut this by explaining that his environment is not actually all that Christian, although it is evident that it still is primarily Christian as both his father and step mother are Christian. Pro then outlines his conscious expectation of boredom in the church, which does however not address Con's point that unconscious influences could have led to his religious experience. Due to forfeits in subsequent rounds, no further argument points can be awarded as there was no opportunity for Pro to defend his position. Therefore, arguments to Con as Pro's reasons for believing in God were questioned and successfully shown to not be convincing beyond reasonable doubt due to naturalistic explanations (e.g. unconscious influences) having just as much explanatory power and possibly even more as they can also explain the religious experiences of other faiths (e.g. Islam)
While I understand that 12h rounds can easily be missed, conduct goes to Con nonetheless as Pro accepted this debate with the knowledge that the time limit is short

As this debate centred around personal experiences, the only sources that were presented related to Pro's prescription medication use and air pressure having little influence on his religious experience, which while true, did not sufficiently support his position to warrant awarding sources points.

Both debaters had reasonable S&G although a bit more structure would have made the debate more legible.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro forfeited 2 Rounds so in order for me to actually provide a vote based on other criteria I would have to see a complete debate. That wasn't the case so my vote is based on conduct and my reason is Pro forfeited 2 Rounds and Con didn't forfeit any Rounds.