azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Yes, there can be no good without God. With out an author, everything then becomes a matter of personal preference and interpretation. There is no objective standard by which to judge things. You can't ask the maker of the product how it should be used. It means man has no purpose for which he was made and therefore there can be no deviation from a norm.  But worse than that is if there is no life after death, then justice becomes a sham. Those who go on shooting sprees and then take their lives escape justice. Hitler escaped justice and got off. But the worst thing is that our lives become pointless and without meaning or value. If we come from nothing and return to nothing, folks we are nothing. Our lives have no value. Then there is no difference between gassing termites and gassing 6 million Jews. That ought to scare any sane person. Because then you become a commodity for the state to use and consume for it's purposes. There is a correlation between Communism and atheism. For further proof pick up a copy of The Guinness Book of World Records and check out the greatest mass murderers of all time: Atheistic regimes, Stalin, Mao etc etc. There is a reason Russia is experiencing a surge in religion. This question is not a theoretical one for them; they know the answer from first hand experience.I do however think the greater question is why do we have to protect ourselves from ourselves. Take the Ten Commandments, it ought to stagger us that God has to tell us not to murder and steal. Wow!! that ought to be a given. We shouldn't have to be told not to do those things. And then to be threatened with punishment knowing we will do those things. Something is amiss at the very core of who we are. Laws can't help us because as soon as they get in the way of what we want, they get broke. And it's painfully obvious religion can't help either; it just becomes a facade we hide behind to justify our actions. Others simply turn to atheism, they close their eyes, cross their fingers and hope no one is home in the universe and proceed to do what they want, when they want. Others still will try to plead ignorance: " I really want to do this and If there is a God I'll just tell Him that I didn't know that it was wrong"Folks, we need to be saved from ourselves, we are the problem. And when you are lost in the forest the worst thing you can do is ask yourself for directions.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Objection number 1:Didn't say you couldn't be good only that you can't account for it, it's the grounding question. You can't account for good or evil in a purely naturalistic world. Those are moral judgments and making moral judgments is not a characteristic of matter. Hence the saying. dumb as a box of rocksObjection 2:When you make something it's usually for a purpose you have in mind, even if it's just to amuse yourself, there is a reason why you do it. If Intelligent Design is correct it would be wise to find out for what purpose we were createdObjection 3:Explain to me then how justice is established?For the record; Atheistic regimes have slaughtered upwards of 100 million people. All other atrocities combined don't even come close. But don't take my word for it. check the records. Ideas have consequences and Darwin's produced the bloodiest century in human history. And Darwin's theory was atheistic to the core.Objection 4:Again, you most certainly can, but you can't ground it.Objection 5:See the answer to objection 3 and go look up the greatest mass murderers in the Guinness Book of World Records.Objection 6:The evidence doesn't support your assertion. Objection 7: I was driving at the point that we even violate each other. that we do it at all is the greater problem. But again you can't account for Good or evil, Those are moral judgments and making moral judgments is not a characteristic of matter. Objection 8If there is a God, then we have hope. Because when you have been caught in the rip tide and you're drowning, you don't save yourself. And unless someone jumps into rescue you, you are as good as dead. In atheism, there is no lifeguard and no one on shore, you are all alone. In Christianity the lifeguard is on duty and He is able to save and He does. How differently will you live your life once you have been taken out of the mouth of death as it swallowed you ?In what do you have hope? and not the wishful thinking kind, that does no one any good. The confident certain kind that you can stand on.About crossing fingers. Take the time to read Pascal's Wager. I think the way I characterized atheism is pretty accurate. The smart money is on Jesus.Objection 9: You presuppose the descent of Man and then use that paradigm to interpret the facts. Might I suggest there might be another way to account for religion. The trouble with your explanation is that it is far to simple and fails to account for a great deal of factors; such as the reality that men don't event things far for terrible than what they know. The idea is always to appease the gods, aka forces of nature, you don't make something up vastly superior to the natural world.And again you mis-characterize history.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

The problem with pascal's wager is that it doesn't say which god you should believe in - using pascal's logic you should probably just find out which god is the most jealous of belief in other gods, has the best reward and worst punishment. So if the flying speghetti monster promises worse than weeping and gnashing of teeth, then you should believe in it rather than YWYH.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

The decent of man more aptly accounts for our dichotomous moral values that treats people of our clan/country/team etc better than others. during the process of evolution we had to learn how to cooperate with human beings to be more successful hunters but compete against other tribes etc. for resources.if we went with: love thy enemy, love thy neighbor as thyself, and to be perfect sell everything you own and follow me - we would have a much different society than we have today
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

iamdavidh,You seem like a very open minded guy, so I'd like to buy a book for you. I want to do that since I think you would give it a fair reading and I would like to get your opinion on it since it weighs heavily in my opinion on the existence of god. Anthony Flew held many of the same views you do, if not more. But something changed and I find it very compelling. If you are going to change my mind you need to overcome his argument, I've included a link to amazon.com so just say the word and I'll buy it for you.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

You seem to miss the question at hand. The question is not can you or do you have morality, I agree you do and can. I also believe you can come up with all kinds of reasons for it; which you clearly prove you can. The problem is that all the devices you use do it; reason, logic, your mind, thought, reflection, moral assessments etc. and the morality, ethics, rules etc you come up with are not characteristics of matter nor are they physical in nature.  The Atheistic worldview is purely naturalistic by definition and asserts that matter is all there is. It therefore can't, by definition, have non-materlistic things in it, like logic, reason, morality, ethics etc. So your use of such things disproves your assertion and confirms mine.So then the grounding question becomes critical. To form a correct view of the world one must have an adequate explanation for the things he finds in it. Otherwise your view will be inadequate and quite possibly incorrect. So I assert that your worldview is woefully inadequate to explain all of reality. And is therefore faulty because it's scope is to narrow and explanation far to simplistic.I've included a link to another book for your consideration. And again You'll have to adequately over come the arguments that are made in this book to change my mind.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

is running a property of matter? can rocks run? what level of locomotion requires god to exist - jellyfish, hydra?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Objection to Objection 3:Atheistic regimes have slaughtered upwards of 100 million people And religion hasn't done its share of slaughtering? How about the unrecorded atrocities committed in the name of god during colonial times? and the continuing killings going on now the name of that same entity in the middle east and all over the world? what about sacrifices done to god by the mayans and astecs? Killings in the name of one god or another are in everyone's history books. Why continue perpetuating myths? When you mention atheistic regimes I assume you are referring mostly done by communism, in which case the reason behind it was ideology... not "atheism". Whereas in the religious killings, the name of god was actually used as a reason.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

You really should do your research before making comments like these because you lose credibility with those who have.Take all the religious killings and they still don't come close to those done by atheistic ideology(communism) What these Communistic regimes did was the logical out working of the atheismism they held to. It should be painfully obvious that atheism is a flawed worldview.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Not just communists... all regimes including capitalism (which imo has caused the most) have caused billions of deaths, directly or indirectly.Lord of War anybody?... That's definately not religion in play.Blood Diamond?Just examples of how capitalism holds people down to benefit themselves.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

re: grounding question (from above):Put 100 devout people in separate rooms and ask them 100 moral questions (e.g. if a pregnant woman has cancer, can she get chemotherapy to likely save her life if it would likely kill the baby?) - you will get many different answers and different justifications - so if there is objective morality, humans cannot converse with god and figure out what it is. We would still be left with subjective morality only we would be judged by a god who has an objective morality and sends people to the lake of fire based on a morality they can't know.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"If Intelligent Design is correct it would be wise to find out for what purpose we were created" - how would you go about doing that? even with a god, what is your higher purpose, live a life of suffering that the god had provided you while loving that god?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"Explain to me then how justice is established?"Isn't it just as likely that our desire for perfect justice was the impetus to assign this attribute to god?"Atheistic regimes have slaughtered upwards of 100 million people"Wouldn't the god that created all the terrible atheists have even that blood on its hands?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"In what do you have hope? and not the wishful thinking kind, that does no one any good. The confident certain kind that you can stand on" - seems like you just want to dismiss positive thinking just like atheist want to dismiss god - if thinking good thoughts has just as much positive outcome and hope etc., then it is just as valid
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Downvoted, because you copy-pasted your response to me and reposted it as a dispute to someone else with a position not entirely dissimilar from mine.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

I did that unintentionally cause I didn't know if it went threw or not when my computer was having problems.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

In order to answer this question the first thing we have to agree upon is on our views of human nature or on the potential of human nature. It seems as the belief in God for the greater good is correlated with the belief that human beings are evil and that have no potential to do good unless they have some belief in a supernatural force. Contradictorily, most religions are based upon the notion that man is a "fallen" creature that needs to be redeemed through rituals, or some sort of metaphysical connection to a higher being. Religion and the belief in God are sustained by the thought that we are evil. The situation we are in right now religions have preeminence in dictating moral standards. Thus, the basis for our understanding of human nature comes from the religious basis that we need some sort of enlightment or redemption to be restored to a higher plane. In this situation the only way to achieve a greater good is through God. thus when yuo say "people turn to atheism and do what they want," you are assuming that this means they will turn into some sort of savages. This is not true. This is just based on your conception of human nature which comes from religion. I would like to see an interpretation of human nature that is not based on religious premises. One that more objectively demonstrates our potential to be good or bad depending on the environment we are raised, our level of education, and our own genetic disposition.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

How do you account for educated people who are raised in good environments that commit evil?Also, I'd like to know why people love to do what they know is wrong.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

And how do you account for the vast amount of religious people who also commit "evil"? I argue that determining what is "right" or "wrong" based on belief is inaccurate and subjective. People do things "because god told me so" (no matter what god that is) without questioning why or really thinking for themselves. Scientific reasoning (I do not mean just science but perhaps the use of the scientific method) can lead us to find a "greater good" in a more objective way. Why is homosexuality wrong? Why is sodomy wrong? A better measure would be to check whether or not your actions are harmful to you or to others, and then measure your behavior accordingly. This is better than just "god told me to do it" which leaves the issue open to having any god tell you any kind of crazy thing "god told me to go kill the abortionists". There was actually a case a couple of years ago in one state about a pastor who killed a doctor that was performing abortions. And the congregation supported him. Im sure you will say "well, that is extreme, bla bla bla" and make some excuse about how those people were not true followers... but the thing is, religion is subjective and it is left to ones "relationship with god". How do you explain to that man that killed the abortionist that his relationship with god is not legitimate? How would YOU argue for that? Do you have a direct line to god? things get easier if we have the means to determine whether our behavior is harmful to ourself or others. Now science can tell us a lot about how to behave in ways that are less harmful to ourself, to the environment, and to society in general. The bible does not say anything about protecting the environment, which is an issue of importance to all of us. But in my personal identification of "right" and "wrong" I say the overuse of pet bottles is wrong, because Ive learned the effects they can have on the environment. - Just an example. What greater goods have come from the belief in God? I want you to explain to me how religion is NOT subjective. When followers have to listen to a pastor/priest interpret things for them. Or when followers constantly justify their own behavior with an explanation that all that matters is a "personal relationship" with God. I really wonder how God is speaking to all these people directly in ways that contradict each other.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

so whats your point? that everybody should hear two sides to every single story they hear?The point is to illustrate that more information about a subject leads to better judgment on it. Ideally we should refrain from emitting moral judgments when we don't have enough information. The point was on how information, not the subjectivity of religion, leads to better judgments. thats because you are talking to religious people using religious answers Evidently, this is your case, as you are trying to pose a defense for god. On questioning. Questioning should not be "overcome" as if it was an obstacle. Questions just need answers. When religious people seek answers in prayer, the answer has a high chance of just being a subjective personal intuition. If religious people would really look for answers they would have to start by first questioning the very existence of god, and requiring proof. you cannot say one has a better law just because it doesn't agree with your ideologyOf course it is possible to judge whether an ideology is right or wrong, just as it is possible to judge the morality of anything else. Laws that do not give equal treatment to it's inhabitants , are laws that lack a good morality. When slavery was accepted, for example, the definition of citizen was not applicable to the slaves, as they were not awarded the same rights. I do not agree with it, not because of some "personal ideology" but because I believe all human beings to be equal. In your example of a country that bans homosexuality, I would also find that rather disgusting - how can it be right to judge a person by what he/she does in bed? are they harmful to society? how? Anyway, thank you for showing your low level of maturity. With this, I abstain from the ridiculous debate that you have created. But again, I don't have enough information to judge you as a good or bad person as I lack the information about your age, your educational level, and the degree of your faith. ... ;-) cheers. And I didn't need god to tell me that pre-judging a person is bad... Or maybe if I had god then I could make a quick prejudgment and say you are a bigot.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Lol.. low level debate. Thanks luv, now I know it is actually good.Ideally we should refrain from emitting moral judgments when we don't have enough informationSo how much is enough information?? Do we actually know enough about anything to make the right choice?? You can only make a 100% correct judgement once you know EVERYTHING.. not just about one thing, but everything about everything... i.e. omnipotence. Because with that knowledge you would know the reaction to your action 100%.When religious people seek answers in prayer, the answer has a high chance of just being a subjective personal intuition. If religious people would really look for answers they would have to start by first questioning the very existence of god, and requiring proof.Ofcourse it MIGHT be subjective personal intuition. Someone would only every give their opinion. If somebody came and asked you about God, don't tell me you'd say He exists... or give strong points to His existance. In the same way youve got as much subjective personal intuition.. even though I know you like to think you don't. Religious people tend to be religious after having looked at answers or accepting answers. Nobody is religious without thinking about it atleast once in their lifetime.Slavery - You're telling me it's wrong?The economical benefits they provide.. manual labour.. make lives easier for their owners etc. I'm not one to agree with it.. but you con't tell me there's no positives to slavery.I do not agree with it, not because of some "personal ideology" but because I believe all human beings to be equalContradiction. Believing all human beings are equal is an ideology.In your example of a country that bans homosexuality, I would also find that rather disgusting - how can it be right to judge a person by what he/she does in bed? are they harmful to society? how?It's disgusting to you?? Homosexuality itself is disgusting to me. Not because of God or what my parents say. Again when it comes to gayness.. my reasoning will seem absurd and easily arguable.. but I think I'm right when it comes to it. But YOU reasoning that people should be able to do whatever they want to aslong as they think it doesn't affect anybody is selfishness to the maximum.I'm a bigot huh? you're obviously completely tolerant of religious people. It's a shame.. I thought you were intelligent at the start.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Very good points. About the matter of the different direct lines to God, there's this little funny movie here, which might help religious people see how subjective their own point of view is... Enjoy! ^^
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"With out an author, everything then becomes a matter of personal preference and interpretation"everything is still personal preference and interpretation - which god to believe in, which texts get canonized, and their applicability and meaning given current circumstancesperfect justice, meaning, etc. are only perceived implications - they do not provide evidence for a god, nor specify what god to believe. it is just as likely that we invented and hold on to religion because we want to believe those things exist
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

are we forget ? who is the Creator us in the world? is it a human? is it a president? or is it a priest? we are burned in to the world because of god hand,, the god have been giving us mercy and blessing so we can enjoy in this world with many complete body,,every day,,every time,, the god was giving us existence so we can take a walk with our girlfriend or our boyfriend go to the mall,, hangout,, eating,, swimming,,joking,, and other event,, ARE YOU DO NOT REALIZE ? the god was giving us two hand so we can use it for doing something such as eating,,foot ball,, play a game,, giving thing to pauper and other good action,, ARE YOU STILL DO NOT REALIZE ?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Sources please.I fail to see anything in this semi-literate rant that would convince me you have any idea what you are talking about.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

Did you notice the incoherent rambling and abuse of grammar without one instance of misspelling?Ah, what the hell, maybe CD ought to offer grammar-check as well as spell-check, all of which is semi-checked. CD ought to develop a new kind of check: Think-check! Oops! Conflict of interest!!!!I wish I had your degree of compassion. I may be too compassionate.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

is it more likely that an animal with 10 fingers, 10 toes, a heart, a brain, fingernails, lungs, appendix, eyes etc - started eating some meat which was easier for digestion using less energy to process food allowing for better brain development leading to several branches of hominids (homo sapiens, neanderthal, etc.) and homo sapiens survived by adapting well to the changes that occurredoran all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful, all good, omnipresent yet invisible, 3-spirit single god breathed into dirt to make us in his image which just so happened to look a lot like that monkey and have 98.5% of the same dna?