I’ve been apart of several debates and discussions in my day and I’ve always saw that real trouble usual came when the topic was discussing truisms that were only relevant to the poster, specifically the theological one that claims “God exists”

The one thing that gets me is that there are so many people who identify their set of truths with themselves that they are incapable of acknowledging a more convincing set of truths. The sheer magnitude of their investiture in these personal truths would necessitate, if found to be false, a entire reworking of their lives.

Can any belief system be argued at any level except for it’s the historical and cultural significance?

Objective reality exists outside us, but it seems that each person comes up with or accepts someone else’s interpretation of reality, and they call that truth.  While a few are able to examine their beliefs and recognize inconsistencies or errors, then modify their view of reality, most appear to be incapable or unwilling to do that.  We see examples of the former in this Forum from members who have said they were raised and believed in theism, but later saw that it didn’t square with reality. 

I think most belief systems should be argued or accepted based only on observed physical reality. 

Occam