Anyone want to debate this formally with me?

[Minimalist]

There is an important distinction.

Only to the irrational.

[robvalue]

To be able to debate something I think you need to define terms.

What do you mean by

(a) God
(b) Belief
© Irrational
(d) Proof

Because if you are using the informal definitions, then believing something for which there is no good evidence is irrational, so not much of a debate. Can I prove that it's irrational? Well, depends what you mean by prove. I just proved it by writing that sentence, which is consistent using informal definitions.

So I can't understand how your position makes any sense unless you can be more specific. For example, if you are defining god to be "whatever causes the universe to start" then you are making a tautology to say that the cause of the universe is god. Also it makes the unfounded assumption that the universe has a cause. But I can only guess what your definitions are.

[Mudhammam]

Belief in God is irrational in at least the following two ways:
1. The terms purported to constitute the metaphysical monster: atemporal, non-spatial, immutable, transcendent, omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, infinite, etc. Concepts are useful for the very reason that they cut and divide; their meanings are derived from their uniqueness, their separation, their distinctive features. To say that God is unlimited or infinite in any of the traditional characteristics typically attributed to him is to essentially declare God boundless. However, you cannot say that God is THIS without excluding him from THAT, or in other words, without placing limitations on his nature; to do so contradicts God's infinity. Thus, you run into a problem of eliminating the essential feature that gives a concept meaning, which is boundary, that which distinguishes it apart from other concepts.
2. On top of requiring meaningful content, a belief may be considered rational only if it is demonstrable that the premises from which the conclusion is drawn are true. One may ASSUME certain premises and rationally hold that the conclusion follows, but one cannot maintain that the assumed premises are rational without inference to experience. Here, with any proposition approaching God, we're given no such ground, as--by definition--such a being, or to put it another way, being such, transcends experience.

[Cyberman]

Not everything is about having an argument.

Debates usually are...right?

Someone not using a mobile please put up the Monty Python "Argument Sketch" for Mystic's benefit.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't think that premise is worthy of debate. The irrationality of faith can be shown with one exchange:

What's your evidence?
I don't have any, but --
Okay.

[Ben Davis]

Someone not using a mobile please put up the Monty Python "Argument Sketch" for Mystic's benefit.

My pleasure.

[Whateverist]

Whateverist, I hereby challenge you to a formal, on-going snide remarks on the side contest that rolls in and out as the mood strikes us, for the remainder of our time here at AF.

Oh this is so on! Challenge accepted.

By the way, I appreciate the level of specificity in your challenge. If either of us makes a forced snide remark at a time when the mood clearly had not stricken us, it should be ruled a point for the other side .. don't you think?

[robvalue]

OK well, here's another argument:

Are there some things that can exist without having been created?

If yes, how do you know the universe isn't one of those things?

If no, then god needs a creator, his creator needs a creator, and so on into an infinity of creators.

[Chas]

OK well, here's another argument:

Are there some things that can exist without having been created?

If yes, how do you know the universe isn't one of those things?

If no, then god needs a creator, his creator needs a creator, and so on into an infinity of creators.

Believing something for which there is no evidence, even indirect evidence, is irrational. Your turn.

[TreeSapNest]

Believing something for which there is no evidence, even indirect evidence, is irrational. Your turn.

Am I irrational if I believe my neighbor when he tells me he saw a mouse in his basement?