Belief in an afterlife negatively impacts the world of practical affairs

First I will answer my opponent's rebuttals to my argument, then his argument as CON, namely that belief in the afterlife has a positive impact on the world of practical affairs, and finally develop my own argument further. 1. "I concede this to be the case. " - Excellent. We are in agreement so far. 2. "Belief in an afterlife is a function of faith. My opponent has not linked belief in the afterlife to the impacts he makes in this point. Therefore, the entirety of his 'proof' lies with his third argument. " - Let me first say that I was not attempting to formulate a "proof," but trying to make a point building up to my primary argument - that point in this case being "belief in the afterlife is a function of faith" (. http://dictionary.reference.com..., def. #2 in the sense that we are discussing), and that faith, in that it is a product of the human mind and not subject to any proof, can and often does have disastrous consequences as it by definition ignores any evidence to its contradiction, or even doubt. Belief in the afterlife is a function of faith, therefore belief in the afterlife is irrational because faith is irrational. Clearly, this point is not about the impact of belief in the afterlife, but about the possible effects of faith. It naturally follows, though, that if a person believes in an afterlife that they have faith (as it is a function of faith) and all of the issues I brought out are about or involve faith. Your rebuttal does not stand. 3. "How do these people 'try to get to heaven' if not through making the world a better place? " - The word "better" is so subjective and relative that in this context it can mean nearly anything. For the faithful, suicidal jihadist the way to both get to heaven and to make the world a "better" place is by dying in service of Allah, which in this case means ridding the world of infidels. For the Crusaders, the way to get to heaven and make the world a "better" place was to capture and convert the lands and peoples of the Bible. Etc Inquisitors, Witch-burnings. "Further, those intent on converting others compose a very small section of the religious population. " - By the same token, one successful suicide bomber, one religiously inclined (we might say "extremely faithful") tyrant or dictator, or ruler of any kind for that matter, has much more impact on his victims or his subjects (respectively, although sometimes both) than the whole of them ever had on him, by way of murder or by policy. "They are outweighed by those who have a positive benefit. " - This is a highly dubious claim, re: above points. What is your standard of valuation in deciding the quantitative difference between harm and suffering versus charity and goodwill? "This contention is the only one with actual linked impacts, and does not connect to the previous two. Therefore, until he warrants the claims in his third contention, none of his impacts stand. " - You interpret my style incorrectly. The numbers represent points, culminating in the observation that belief in the afterlife has a negative impact (I would not deny that religious charity and goodwill do exist, re: my comment on primacy in R1) on the everyday world. Point One is a very general observation about belief and the general irrationality of believers. Point Two is a more specific observation about faith, which believers have, some of its real and possible implicit and explicit effects on the practical world, and the irrationality of religious faith. Point Three is the impact: the conclusion that the irrationality of belief in an afterlife -after having established my first two points, and now refuted your rebuttals - can be and is ultimately more dangerous than beneficial to the everyday world. The example conversations were intended more as an anecdotal intermission than to be taken literally, obviously. However, they do deserve scrutiny. 1. "War is certainly a practical affair. I fail to see how this supports the resolution. " - War is an *extremely negative* practical affair, at least for the dead, wounded, maimed, disfigured, relocated, and their friends, relatives and loved ones - which I think can be said quite certainly outnumber those that profit from war. It supports the resolution in that it is either consciously or subconsciously, evidently, easier to die or kill for irrational fantasies - faith, as it were, with a view to an afterlife; it is a cushion. 2. "Note that the Fundamentalist's primary reasoning is to uphold the will of Allah, not to get it on with a series of virgins. Further, these radical Muslims compose an infinitesimal portion of the religious community. " - The will Allah in this case is to kill yourself and others (infidels) in his name. For this you are rewarded. It isn't the idea of 70 virgins I'm focusing on - it's the idea of an eternal afterlife. 3. "This scenario is ridiculous, the businessman's belief in the afterlife has not fueled his business practices. This justification is almost never used. The main incentive is greed. " - Indeed, you are exactly right. The businessman's belief in the afterlife didn't fuel his business practices, but the example specifically said "Christian Businessman," which means a sincere Christian. He didn't rape the earth to get to heaven, but he believed that the afterlife was real, via irrational faith, and felt comfortable enough that this life is not the "final reality," as it were, that raping the earth was excusable. The cushion of forever appears again. Yet you are also correct in that his main incentive was greed, which is generally considered to be a sin; thus the forced hypocrisy that religious belief in general causes is exposed . I have yet to meet a Christian who believed they were going to hell - though they have all* said they feared it - in spite of glaring instances contradictory to their own professed ethic. That is only a small portion of the opportunity this example affords me to bring out about the idea of a "Christian Businessman, " but for now I digress. "This debate concerns any persons who believe in the afterlife, not just those who hold it to be of ultimate importance. " - Incorrect. This debate concerns everyone alive, in a sense, because the irrational beliefs of others - namely the belief in an afterlife - so often do have an impact on the lives of innocent strangers, primarily in a negative way, so I hold. In response to your brief CON argument, I believe I have covered nearly everything in the points above. I have already admitted the existence of charity, etc, above. Your argument is noted but fails to disprove my resolution. Back to you Britt