Basic question about typical arguments for existence of god(s)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-06-2015, 01:41 PM
RE: Basic question about typical arguments for existence of god(s)
(07-06-2015 01:25 PM)cjlr Wrote:  The fucking trainwreck Kalam, after all, is a logically valid argument. The conclusion follows from the stated premises. On the other hand, the premises are ass-backward unsubstantiated incoherence incarnate, rather limiting its soundness to the realm of the fevered delusions of madmen.

and fools.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2015, 07:09 PM
RE: Basic question about typical arguments for existence of god(s)
(21-05-2015 01:48 PM)Learner Wrote:  I'm a fairly new atheist (formerly a christian), and not very philosophically minded, so I rely on the articulate definitions and explanations of those more philosophically minded.

Maybe this is a really dumb question...and I may not be formulating this question best, but would it be true to say that even in if the typical logical arguments for the existence of god were somehow sound, it still wouldn't prove the existence of a god because it still doesn't provide any evidence? At the very least, it wouldn't prove any specific god. I feel like I've heard some sort of argument like this before, but need a little help from those more philosophically minded. Thanks for your help.

DING DING DING!

If you want to make conclusions about the real world you have to have input from the real world in order to justify those conclusions. Even if all the argument that were put out by theists were completely sound (which they are not) this still does not mean that god exists. In fact most are attempts to define god into existence. And while you can define the word "god" to mean anything you want, simply creating a theoretical object and slapping the word "god" on it doesn't mean that thing exists in the real world.

I define flibbityjibbets as green floating cubes made of mint chocolate fudge that fly to people in need of fudge to cheer them up. I also say that the definition includes the proposition that they exist necessarily. So where is my flibbityjibbet? I NEED FUDGE!

This is the trick that theists try to get away with, and it is just as valid as my flying fudge thing. If you want to dismiss the flibbityjibbet, then you have to dismiss god by the very same rules.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes natachan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: