Does God exist? (18 Viewers)

[ad infinitum]

Some wild assumptions here.

A/gnosticism, whilst often used completely out of context, does have an intellectual basis in describing your epistemic stance in reply to a proposition. It need not have a purely religious basis (I could be agnostic about the existence of "true love"), whereas "atheism" as a label is contingent to the religious argument.

Indeed, 'Agnostic' is a word so deformed and corrupt that its exile from our language would be cheered upon by me. However I was using it in its most common form- the position of 'we can't know'- a position that often stems from a complete non understanding of how scientific knowledge is verified/falsified.

Let me explain: If the "god" proposition had never been posited, it would not make sense (nor be possible) to be an atheist- "I don't believe in your god" is nonsensical. Atheism exists only in response to theism.

Of course. In the same way that 'aRacism' only makes sense in the context of 'Racism'.

Having said that, you can extend the broad premise of weak atheism to other areas and simply call it skepticism. This is generally the position that defines most modern "atheists" (though I'm careful to make many generalisations).

Sounds like you have it backwards (or at least you are stating it backwards for some strange reason). You don't 'extend the premise' of weak atheism to 'other areas and call it skepticism. You extend the premise of skepticism to areas religion and call it atheism. I don't like it when people start to throw around the terms 'weak' and 'strong' in relation to atheism, it usually indicates a misunderstanding of Atheism. (i.e 'strong AChristianity' would make a tad more sense).

The general position would be:

Let god be X:

I'm not satisfied that you have produced any credible evidence to support the existence of entity X, hence until such suffices, I will reject your claim and stay neutral to its existence. This involves by necessity not adapting a "belief" here.


This is a logical position, yet it can be taken to extreme cases where you would assert that entity X does not exist through a variety of proofs (rational or empirical) [strong atheism].

I don't see how that is a continuation of the premise at all. Taking this 'temporary agnosticism' (which is acceptable- but I would much perfer a different term for this- as not to confuse it with common notions of 'Agnosticism') to an extreme does not result in 'strong atheism'.

This position, like theism is not considered viable (as of yet), but may be considered more probable then its counterpart (theism) among many. However, such inductive logic can have dangers as Hume reminds us in a A Treatise Of Human Nature, in regards to certainty concerning the rising of the morning sun. Whilst such a belief may be pragmatic, we must accept that engaging in inductive generalisation requires we hold an indispensable belief which itself, must remain in an important way ungrounded.

Now returning to agnosticism (a stance on what we can know), a weak atheist can well be an agnostic yet not the later. Agnosticism is a highly credible position if you reach the conclusion that given all form of logic we know, I'm unsatisfied that a final "proof" will be reached in either direction. I will be silent on final certainty, but within the realm of logic/reasoning I am still justfied in being skeptical over some propositions to the other.

Being a theistic agnostic is equally possible (but we would need to delve into degrees of "theism", much like the weak/strong atheistic split).

From the positions given, you sound like a gnostic strong atheist.[/quote]

Your walls of white-noise are to boring and silly to respond to. You are obviously confused over questions of epistomology and confused about the meaning of words.

Nope I am not a 'gnostic strong atheist' (lol?). I am an Atheist. Sounds like you need a good dose of Popper and a little less time spent sitting in awe of those hack philosophy lecturers of yours (Hi KFunk!!!)

 

[PhilosopherKing]

If there was any confusion in my original post (apologies granted) its certainly been reciprocated within your reply.

You misunderstand- I wasn't saying "take agnosticism" to the extreme, I was saying that if you extend beyond what I would call the "null" atheistic position, a life which pragmatically involves no belief/active worship in a deity yet not the explicit conclusion that no deity can ever exist, then you eventually reach the proposition so commonly called "strong atheism". My challenge to this position is that it is gnostic (I know) and pars the positions of many theists:

"I don't need faith. I KNOW god X exists."

Instead of your considerable "null-replys" (where you denounce reasonable discussion as white noise) why not actually extend the discussion in a mature manner (save the insults for the playground)?

Now answer the question I posed to you in another thread:

Do you know with certainty that any god is non-existent?

I joined today, hack philosophy? Kfunk? wtf?

 

[ad infinitum]

If there was any confusion in my original post (apologies granted) its certainly been reciprocated within your reply.

You misunderstand- I wasn't saying "take agnosticism" to the extreme, I was saying that if you extend beyond what I would call the "null" atheistic position, a life which pragmatically involves no belief/active worship in a deity yet not the explicit conclusion that no deity can ever exist, then you eventually reach the proposition so commonly called "strong atheism". My challenge to this position is that it is gnostic (I know) and pars the positions of many theists:

You wrote what you wrote. It's still there. Quite embarrassing really.

Do you know with certainty that any god is non-existent?

Haha, no. In the same way I do not know with 'certainty' that there is an invisible teapot orbiting Jupiter. Why are people like yourself so obsessed with this boring and weary point. Please, go read Popper, or a babies ABC book, or a pop up book, something at least to spare me from your terrible attempts at thinking.

 

[sydchick]

I don't think God exists.

I'm atheist.

Until he tells his "people" (and yes they really call themselves that) to stop bashing on my door every Sunday morning and sell me bibles, try and make me see the light, shove guidelines down my throat and basically PISS ME OFF I doubt that I will ever change from that view.

 

[KFunk]

Please, go read Popper

Please note:
(1) Some notions of God are falsifiable
(2) As with many falsifiable theories in science, if there is a poverty of information it may not be possible to make a secure affirmative or negative judgement, making an agnostic (= a-gnosis = without knowledge) not only sound but also intellectually responsible.

 

[ad infinitum]

Please note:
(1) Some notions of God are falsifiable
(2) As with many falsifiable theories in science, if there is a poverty of information it may not be possible to make a secure affirmative or negative judgement, making an agnostic (= a-gnosis = without knowledge) not only sound but also intellectually responsible.

Umm, yea, you obviously haven't read Popper. Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[TylerDurden09]

Umm, yea, you obviously haven't read Popper. Stop embarrassing yourself.

Why don't you go suck popper off?

 

[TylerDurden09]

Also

I'm positing that:

ad_infinitum =comingupforair

Both shit house, insulting trolls who attempt to dabble in philosophy but only reveal that they have read one source (popper) and demonstrate devout fundamentalism to his word. Leave the thinking to the big boys...

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Also

I'm positing that:

ad_infinitum =comingupforair

Both shit house, insulting trolls who attempt to dabble in philosophy but only reveal that they have read one source (popper) and demonstrate devout fundamentalism to his word. Leave the thinking to the big boys...

err I'm not ad infinitum..
I'm not exactly sure what a 'troll' is, but if it refers to the unapologetic verbal dismantling of confused and weak-minded 'respect my faith' kids, then the label might have some validity..

You and your sunday school pals can rock back and forth to muddled circular logic all day long, call yourself a 'big boy', 'eat the flesh' of Christ, drink his blood, whatever satisfies that dim wit of yours, I really dont care.
But dont for a moment think that there's an actual 'debate', or that there's a chance your onto something, your cult, like all those before it, will vanish,. The sewer your mind inhabits is built upon a Darwinian misfiring, it's nothing new.

My argument is correct, your argument, best described as babble, lost.

 

[TylerDurden09]

err I'm not ad infinitum..
I'm not exactly sure what a 'troll' is, but if it refers to the unapologetic verbal dismantling of confused and weak-minded 'respect my faith' kids, then the label might have some validity..

You and your sunday school pals can rock back and forth to muddled circular logic all day long, call yourself a 'big boy', 'eat the flesh' of Christ, drink his blood, whatever satisfies that dim wit of yours, I really dont care.
But dont for a moment think that there's an actual 'debate', or that there's a chance your onto something, your cult, like all those before it, will vanish,. The sewer your mind inhabits is built upon a Darwinian misfiring, it's nothing new.

My argument is correct, your argument, best described as babble, lost.

1) I'm an atheist.

2) Your words depict nothing less then the 'new age' stereotype of the angry, frustrated atheist. Admit it, your full of hate fuelled through your devout love of Hitchens et al & their wit/charm, which you dually lack.

Your comments offer nothing more then a demonstration that you should be checking yourself into therapy. I don't want to see another Virginia Tech.

I've skimmed the comments of both you and your buddy; you offer no philosophy, no grounded arguments for your strong atheism but rather insults and degredation to any one with the slightest difference in opinion.

Your e-Al qaeda.

 

[TylerDurden09]

You and your sunday school pals can rock back and forth to muddled circular logic all day long, call yourself a 'big boy', 'eat the flesh' of Christ, drink his blood, whatever satisfies that dim wit of yours, I really dont care.

Oh you care very much. Why else would you take the time to mock it?

Also, I'd argue that they are psychologically more healthy then yourself. If we posit that human happiness is the greatest achievement, and they are legitimately happy, surrounded by other individuals, forming bonds, learning with each other and quite often helping the wider community, they are operating in congruence to the meaning of life.

This is a far greater accolade then a bitter, social reject deluded by a false sense of self-enlightenment & certainty (you think your right) who masturbates over every opportunity to break it to creationists that they are in fact an African ape. Is this life really that fun?

 

[TylerDurden09]

Umm, yea, you obviously haven't read Popper. Stop embarrassing yourself.

lol,

Kfunk consistently produces the most thorough, humble & well-researched posts I have seen on BOS over the years.

His intellect consistently supersedes your hate-fuelled bigotry. Remember, hate communication requires the least amount of intelligence...think of rednecks.

 

[mirakon]

Originally Posted by ad infinitum
Incohorent babble. Agnosticism has no intellectual basis.

Completely and utterly wrong. Considering that it is highly unlikely that God will ever be entirely proven or disproven as others assert, agnosticism is a far more logical stance than perhaps atheism or theism. Please stop making a fool of yourself ad infinitum on every thread you go on. I'll respect your opinions if you respect those of others and back your own opinions up with logic instead of pathetic verbal crap.

However I believe in God becuase of the following reasons:

1. Supposing God does exist and I didn't believe in him I'd be screwed in Hell for eternity. If he doesn't exist, I'll die the same way as atheists and would have lost nothing.
2. I'm scared of ceasing to exist. I want an after-life, hopefully in Heaven.
3. I just have a feeling. I know these aren't proofs but I'm just giving you some insight into why people such as myself believe.

 

[Mudkip94]

The only true god is the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Deal with it.

Bored of Studies - Pastafarians

 

[Cookie182]

Completely and utterly wrong. Considering that it is highly unlikely that God will ever be entirely proven or disproven as others assert, agnosticism is a far more logical stance than perhaps atheism or theism. Please stop making a fool of yourself ad infinitum on every thread you go on. I'll respect your opinions if you respect those of others and back your own opinions up with logic instead of pathetic verbal crap.

However I believe in God becuase of the following reasons:

1. Supposing God does exist and I didn't believe in him I'd be screwed in Hell for eternity. If he doesn't exist, I'll die the same way as atheists and would have lost nothing.
2. I'm scared of ceasing to exist. I want an after-life, hopefully in Heaven.
3. I just have a feeling. I know these aren't proofs but I'm just giving you some insight into why people such as myself believe.

So you agree that you believe in god based on no intellectual reasoning whatsoever. I'm not being mocking, but you even conceded that agnosticism is the most logical.

1) This is Pascal's Wager and it’s often agree upon (by theists alike) to be the most ludicrous reasoning for believing in god. In fact, I would question whether it is true belief. Many Christians would quote the sections of the NT that talk about "belief from the heart" etc. Don't you think that if this god did exist they would see through this seemingly pathetic "gamble"?

Note too, your assuming god is malevolent and that the human conception of "hell" being reserved as a place for non-believers and torturous is correct. If god is actually just then he would allow non-believers who lead a good moral life to go to heaven anyway. If he is unjust, the cruellest thing that he could do would actually be to screw over the believers. In sum, this is a stupid reason for believing (if you could call it that).

2) Psychological comfort. I don't have a problem with this, yet I'm curious as to why it would worry you so dearly. There is an infinite set of possible events that we have no conception of that "may occur" and would be frightening if we conceived them. I see no difference between having an irrational fear about becoming possessed like in the exodus, although it doesn't bother me due to the fact that as far as I know, this would have no grounding in reality. We know nothing of death, you may live or not after would. We know however that the biological brain will cease to function and if we assume it is the central hub of all conscious activity, then when you’re dead there is nothing to fear. Anything else regarding a "soul" is a huge guess and you'll just have to wait and find out. Instead of selfishly wanting to live forever, make the most of it now.

3) Nothing more said.

 

[Cookie182]

I'm coming to think that a variant of naturalistic or Spinozan Pantheism is roughly equivalent to the most sensible position.

Assuming we do exist, that is all we know. The origin of our creation, in consideration with the universe, is intriguing but not yet confirmed. The best use of the word "god" is to equate it in rough terms to being the "sum of all things known" (a hollistic approach to the universe).

Whether logic/reasoning actually exist as a seperate or even definite ontological system is questionable, perhaps they are in the simplest terms our evolved terms of guidance.

The point being, being mildly agnostic in the present times is completely rational, being "eternally" agnostic (that is, "we will never know") is not.

The most we can hope to do is what science currently does: uncover the laws of the universe, by definition, this is a spiritual experience that brings us closer to "knowing" god.

This position is not really incompatible IMO with atheism- its more a calmer, more refined and reflective approach.

 

[Cookie182]

Having said what I did above, we must always be skeptical of any methodology which claims to "give knowledge" and accept that the scientific method in itself is not indispensable. Yet, pragmatically it provides the best explanation we currently have for the understanding of natural phenomena. It is still an epistemic position though.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Oh you care very much. Why else would you take the time to mock it?

Also, I'd argue that they are psychologically more healthy then yourself. If we posit that human happiness is the greatest achievement, and they are legitimately happy, surrounded by other individuals, forming bonds, learning with each other and quite often helping the wider community, they are operating in congruence to the meaning of life.

This is a far greater accolade then a bitter, social reject deluded by a false sense of self-enlightenment & certainty (you think your right) who masturbates over every opportunity to break it to creationists that they are in fact an African ape. Is this life really that fun?

ur not fooling anyone....it's very obvious that you're 'KFunk'..that muddled loser who pays money to study philosophy..

It's sad, you got so intellectually embassared that you felt the need to make some faux account..pathetic really, allthough you still struggle to articulate a penetrating critique, you merely repeat the type of words I use to mock idiots on this forum, ala 'redneck' and 'bigot',
A bizarre emotionial diatribe really, you sound like some 60 year old female religous apologist, who, on having her reality destroyed by someone who actually thinks, starts to cry and appeals to the fact the church 'helps the homeless' or some shit.

Not sure why you think i'm 'frustrated', I laugh when I type up my posts...you, on the other hand, are clearly quite upset , we all know you, sitting in the basement of some Hillsong complex, sweat and shake and bang your keyboard, frantically churning out tenth-rate mush under the keen eye of brother Joseph (Hillsong Captain #23) , who sit's behind you clutching the back of your neck, muttering sinister master-slave commands into your ear.

 

[TylerDurden09]

ur not fooling anyone....it's very obvious that you're 'KFunk'..that muddled loser who pays money to study philosophy..

It's sad, you got so intellectually embassared that you felt the need to make some faux account..pathetic really, allthough you still struggle to articulate a penetrating critique, you merely repeat the type of words I use to mock idiots on this forum, ala 'redneck' and 'bigot',
A bizarre emotionial diatribe really, you sound like some 60 year old female religous apologist, who, on having her reality destroyed by someone who actually thinks, starts to cry and appeals to the fact the church 'helps the homeless' or some shit.

Not sure why you think i'm 'frustrated', I laugh when I type up my posts...you, on the other hand, are clearly quite upset , we all know you, sitting in the basement of some Hillsong complex, sweat and shake and bang your keyboard, frantically churning out tenth-rate mush under the keen eye of brother Joseph (Hillsong Captain #23) , who sit's behind you clutching the back of your neck, muttering sinister master-slave commands into your ear.

Kfunk is one smart dude.

I'm honoured that you make the comparison.

Wow you know a lot about Hillsong, bad experience?

 

[TylerDurden09]

Completely and utterly wrong. Considering that it is highly unlikely that God will ever be entirely proven or disproven as others assert, agnosticism is a far more logical stance than perhaps atheism or theism. Please stop making a fool of yourself ad infinitum on every thread you go on. I'll respect your opinions if you respect those of others and back your own opinions up with logic instead of pathetic verbal crap.

However I believe in God becuase of the following reasons:

1. Supposing God does exist and I didn't believe in him I'd be screwed in Hell for eternity. If he doesn't exist, I'll die the same way as atheists and would have lost nothing.
2. I'm scared of ceasing to exist. I want an after-life, hopefully in Heaven.
3. I just have a feeling. I know these aren't proofs but I'm just giving you some insight into why people such as myself believe.

Hi I'm a strong Atheist.

I have a personal faith that God doesn't exist becuase of the following reasons:

1. Supposing that god does exist, whether I believe or not, I'll be submitted to this horrible, eternal dictatorship. A 24/7 totalitarian state: I'll be persecuted for even my most inner thoughts and feelings. The best bet is to deny the whole thing.
2. I'm scared of not ceasing to exist. I dont want an after-life, only when I'm truly dead (biologically + spiritually) can I fully be at peace.
3. I just have a feeling. I know these aren't proofs but I'm just giving you some insight into why people such as myself believe