Poll: Atheists only: Do you believe no god(s) exists?
Yes, I believe no god(s) exists
No, I do not believe no god(s) exists
[Show Results]
 
For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-02-2017, 09:23 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 06:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  [...] Absent of any reason to assume other wise, the only position one can have is a lack of belief, not a belief that X is not true. To assume X is not true, or X does not exist, you'd have you'd have reasons for that, and not just a mere lack of evidence, such as the natural world is all that's known to exist, therefore it likely all that exist, therefore nothing non-natural/supernatural likely exist, or nothing that violates the laws of physics exist, etc...

Nope. You're splitting hairs here. One does not need any evidence to accept the tenet that something is not true, or does not exist. If you truly need viable evidence to prove to you that unicorns don't exist, then your powers of logic must be seriously diminished.

I know that gods, ghosts, fairies, and angels don't exist—primarily because each of them is nothing more than an imaginary human construct. Precisely in the same way that the Lernaean Hydra, Beowulf, King Arthur, or William Tell were all fictional.

But I suppose it's pretty obvious that theists maintain a massive suspension of disbelief in order to blindly accept the existence of their god, and all the unfounded myths in their holy book?

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 09:49 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2017 10:09 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 09:23 AM)SYZ Wrote:  
(04-02-2017 06:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  [...] Absent of any reason to assume other wise, the only position one can have is a lack of belief, not a belief that X is not true. To assume X is not true, or X does not exist, you'd have you'd have reasons for that, and not just a mere lack of evidence, such as the natural world is all that's known to exist, therefore it likely all that exist, therefore nothing non-natural/supernatural likely exist, or nothing that violates the laws of physics exist, etc...

Nope. You're splitting hairs here. One does not need any evidence to accept the tenet that something is not true, or does not exist. If you truly need viable evidence to prove to you that unicorns don't exist, then your powers of logic must be seriously diminished.

I know that gods, ghosts, fairies, and angels don't exist—primarily because each of them is nothing more than an imaginary human construct. Precisely in the same way that the Lernaean Hydra, Beowulf, King Arthur, or William Tell were all fictional.

But I suppose it's pretty obvious that theists maintain a massive suspension of disbelief in order to blindly accept the existence of their god, and all the unfounded myths in their holy book?
This isn't about Theists.
This is about Agnostic Atheists vs Gnostic Atheists.
You are on the side of Gnostic Atheism.
Tomasia & I are on the side of Agnostic Atheism.

We are saying we don't know if God does or does not exist
You are saying you know God does not exist.

We are saying we have no evidence for or against the existence of God, hence we remain Agnostic.
You are saying the lack of evidence for the existence of God is evidence for the none existence of God.

I am saying the lack of Evidence is not Evidence.

Now your arguing with the "It's obvious" card.
That's not an argument, that's just your opinion.
I can't argue against your opinion, because I have no evidence for or against your opinion so where do we go from there?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 10:07 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 09:23 AM)SYZ Wrote:  Nope. You're splitting hairs here. One does not need any evidence to accept the tenet that something is not true, or does not exist. If you truly need viable evidence to prove to you that unicorns don't exist, then your powers of logic must be seriously diminished.

I believe unicorns don't exist, because I believe they are imaginary creatures, products of children's fairy tales, and cartoons etc...

It doesn't follow from no evidence that something is not true. No evidence in and of itself for x, can only lead to a interminable position, i.e not knowing one way or the other whether it's true of false.

If I have no evidence that Agnostic shane is married, or not married, then my position is I don't know one way or the other. I can't claim the position that Agnosit Shane is married, is false, as a result of having no evidence, I can only claim it's unknown.

Quote:I know that gods, ghosts, fairies, and angels don't exist—primarily because each of them is nothing more than an imaginary human construct. Precisely in the same way that the Lernaean Hydra, Beowulf, King Arthur, or William Tell were all fictional.

So your belief that God don't exist, is not based on there being no evidence per se, but on the fact that Gods, ghosts, fairies etc.. have the qualities of non-existent things, i.e imaginary human constructs, rather than real things.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tomasia's post
04-02-2017, 11:41 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 10:07 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  So your belief that God don't exist, is not based on there being no evidence per se, but on the fact that Gods, ghosts, fairies etc.. have the qualities of non-existent things, i.e imaginary human constructs, rather than real things.

Lack of evidence is one of those properties.

But that isn't really the thrust here. It is not merely that there is no evidence for gods; it is that there is no evidence where we would expect to find some. If someone tells you that there is an elephant in the living room, and you look in the living room to see no elephant, that is evidence that the elephant does not exist.

There is a complete lack of evidence that any intelligent agency was involved in the creation of the universe, including even and especially any part of it related to Earth and its life forms. We can reasonably conclude that no gods exist from this.

If you want to assert that "yeah but maybe they just live really far away", then yes, you do fall under the same rule that lets us reasonably conclude that unicorns do not exist. Making shit up and then trying to assert it as actual possibility does not make it so.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 11:58 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2017 12:13 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 11:41 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(04-02-2017 10:07 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  So your belief that God don't exist, is not based on there being no evidence per se, but on the fact that Gods, ghosts, fairies etc.. have the qualities of non-existent things, i.e imaginary human constructs, rather than real things.

Lack of evidence is one of those properties.

But that isn't really the thrust here. It is not merely that there is no evidence for gods; it is that there is no evidence where we would expect to find some. If someone tells you that there is an elephant in the living room, and you look in the living room to see no elephant, that is evidence that the elephant does not exist.

There is a complete lack of evidence that any intelligent agency was involved in the creation of the universe, including even and especially any part of it related to Earth and its life forms. We can reasonably conclude that no gods exist from this.

If you want to assert that "yeah but maybe they just live really far away", then yes, you do fall under the same rule that lets us reasonably conclude that unicorns do not exist. Making shit up and then trying to assert it as actual possibility does not make it so.
Firstly we would have to define God before we can say it doesn't exist.

There is evidence of some fine tuning of the universe.
From wiki:

Martin Rees formulates the fine-tuning of the Universe in terms of the following six dimensionless physical constants.
N, the ratio of the strength of electromagnetism to the strength of gravity for a pair of protons, is approximately 1036. According to Rees, if it were significantly smaller, only a small and short-lived universe could exist.
Epsilon (ε), a measure of the nuclear efficiency of fusion from hydrogen to helium, is 0.007: when four nucleons fuse into helium, 0.007 (0.7%) of their mass is converted to energy. The value of ε is in part determined by the strength of the strong nuclear force. If ε were 0.006, only hydrogen could exist, and complex chemistry would be impossible. According to Rees, if it were above 0.008, no hydrogen would exist, as all the hydrogen would have been fused shortly after the big bang. Other physicists disagree, calculating that substantial hydrogen remains as long as the strong force coupling constant increases by less than about 50%.
Omega (Ω), commonly known as the density parameter, is the relative importance of gravity and expansion energy in the Universe. It is the ratio of the mass density of the Universe to the "critical density" and is approximately 1. If gravity were too strong compared with dark energy and the initial metric expansion, the universe would have collapsed before life could have evolved. On the other side, if gravity were too weak, no stars would have formed.
Lambda (λ), commonly known as the cosmological constant, describes the ratio of the density of dark energy to the critical energy density of the universe, given certain reasonable assumptions such as positing that dark energy density is a constant. In terms of Planck units, and as a natural dimensionless value, the cosmological constant, λ, is on the order of 10−122. This is so small that it has no significant effect on cosmic structures that are smaller than a billion light-years across. If the cosmological constant were not extremely small, stars and other astronomical structures would not be able to form.
Q, the ratio of the gravitational energy required to pull a large galaxy apart to the energy equivalent of its mass, is around 10−5. If it is too small, no stars can form. If it is too large, no stars can survive because the universe is too violent, according to Rees.
D, the number of spatial dimensions in spacetime, is 3. Rees claims that life could not exist if there were 2 or 4.

When you read these statistics does it give you the impression that it's more likely to have happened by chance or by design?

Martin Rees also said he has no religious beliefs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 12:02 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
When it comes to the claim that Shane is married or not compared to say the claim that Shane is all powerful leprechaun, you should notice right away how different these claims are.

Being married is a fairly normal state. Lots of people are married. This is a demonstrable fact. Shane could provide evidence of being married.

Holding a belief that Shane is married without any evidence is simply an unverified belief. It's a belief that can be shown to be true or false.

But let's say you hold the belief that Shane isn't married despite being shown lots of evidence proving Shane is married. Now that becomes a problem.

Let's now say you believe Shane is an all powerful leprechaun. There is no evidence to support your belief but you hold onto it anyway. Again, this is a problem.

Do you think believing that Shane is not married is in any way comparable to believing that Shane is an all powerful leprechaun ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 12:13 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 11:58 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  There is evidence of some fine tuning of the universe...

This is evidence for Deism.

Sorry, but the fine-tuning argument is so full of flaws, misunderstandings and assumptions that it cannot be taken seriously.

Sean Carroll obliterates the fine tuning argument here:


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heath_Tierney's post
04-02-2017, 12:41 PM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2017 01:10 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
Sean Carol is arguing against WLC here, not Martin Rees. He is debunking God, not the fine tuning probabilities presented by Martin Rees.
Even Martin Rees says he has no religious beliefs.

All of the 6 parameters presented by Martin Rees show that:
"The smallest changes to the early universe would have resulted in drastic changes to our present Universe.
One of them being it's none existence, & even if it were to exist the possibility of it being able to sustain human life would be infinitesimally small."

This isn't a belief, it's hard facts.

Can we claim the early universe progression into it's present state is the result of purely Entropic causes? It would be the equivalent of believing in the improbable.
Science does not uphold a belief in the improbable.

Another such example is the "Axis of Evil"
It's highly unlikely such a pattern could exist in the early Universe, yet it's there.

The argument I am making is simply this:
If it's highly unlikely that something is random then it usually has a cause.
In the absence of any scientific explanation sensible theories are developed.

One of the Theories, put forward is that of intelligent design. No other theories exist to explain the phenomenon except that of Intelligent Design so why not acknowledge it as a possibility?

The Theory of Evolution best explains life on this planet. It has not been proven but the Evidence is much greater than all other theories so we have adopted this theory as the most plausible.

The Theory of Intelligent Design of the early universe best explains the Existence of the Current universe when compared to all other theories. The theists are saying we should adopt tho theory as the most plausible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2017, 12:44 PM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2017 12:53 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 11:58 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  There is evidence of some fine tuning of the universe.

If by fine-tuning they mean everything must be this way then sure.

(Grounding my own reference before Vera chastises me again.)




This is the best part of the trip, This is the trip, the best part, I really like. What'd he say?

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
04-02-2017, 12:56 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(04-02-2017 12:41 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  From this I don't see how anyone can still claim the early universe progression into it's present state is the result of purely Entropic causes.

Argument from incredulity.

Just because we don't understand something does not automatically equate to divine intervention.

Also, the universe may not be as fine-tuned as one might believe. Sources: Is the Universe Fine-Tuned for Life?

and

Why the universe wasn't fine-tuned for life
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: