"The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-10-2014, 01:41 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
(14-10-2014 01:04 PM)fidel_cashflow Wrote:  So I did a random Yahoo! Search on the word Atheism in the hopes of stumbling onto a Yahoo! Article discussing god/creationism and/or Atheism because, as some of you may or may not know, a vast majority of Yahoo! Commenters are Conservative, Creationist, homophobic @$%*wits that just seem to love it when people like me decide to comment on an article.(I guess giving a bunch of thumbs down to someones comment and then threatening them with hellfire gives them great joy.) And I happened to stumble across this: The failure of Atheism to account for existence

Now, being the critical examiner that I am, I always try to sift through the BS to find the most prudent or most relevant part of any argument. And to me, this part of the article stuck out the most:

"If the atheist were to say that the universe brought itself into existence, then that would be illogical since something that does not exist has no nature; and with no nature, there are no attributes; and with no attributes, actions can’t be performed such as bringing itself into existence. So, that doesn’t work.
"

But of course, I'm sure Mr. Matt Slick, like most creationists, fail to realize that this argument could also be directly applied to the existence of god. I'm just curious to see what you guys think of the article and this argument in particular.

Science still has not said either way that we came from something prior or came out of nothing. QM is real science that is freaky enough to point both ways. What these idiots don't want to accept is what Hawkins has said "A God is not required".

They want a cognition to be the starting point, but science has always proven that when we fill a gap that was unknown before we never find anything super natural. I look at everything in the universe as being like a giant weather pattern. An non cognitive process, like seasons changing.

These idiots rightfully accept that Thor does not cause or make lightening, so why would the universe need a magical being to happen?

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
14-10-2014, 01:43 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
Also, if their argument is "everything has a cause" then what caused their god? If God doesn't need a cause then why would the universe need one?

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2014, 01:44 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
(14-10-2014 01:21 PM)fidel_cashflow Wrote:  
(14-10-2014 01:18 PM)Chas Wrote:  Atheism has nothing to say about existence, so there is no failure.
I respectfully disagree. I, as an atheist, believe that our existence was brought about by a series of spontaneous, cataclysmic events that our beyond our current scientific understanding for now.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more. It would be entirely possible to not believe in gods yet believe in powerful, creator leprechauns. It would be baseless, and stupid, but it would still technically be an atheistic belief.

That being said...

(14-10-2014 01:04 PM)fidel_cashflow Wrote:  I'm just curious to see what you guys think of the article and this argument in particular.

It's effectively a cosmological/prime mover argument. The problem with that argument is, if you ask a skeptic how the universe started (or, what started the big bang), they will say "I don't know". The cosmological argument looks to answer that question (with a healthy dose of presupposition), but all it really does is kick the "I don't know" can back a step or two. If you push the creationist long enough, they will eventually hit that same "I don't know" phase, and will have simply filled the gap with unfounded assertions.

Creationist: Everything in the universe has a cause, including the universe. God is the cause of the universe.
Skeptic: What caused God?
Creationist: He has no cause.
Skeptic: That's special pleading. You just violated your universal law that you used to prove God.
Creationist: God doesn't need a cause.
Skeptic: Why?
Creationist: He's eternal.
Skeptic: What makes him eternal?
Creationist: He just is

And it's really at this point where it gets really obvious they're just making things up to support what they already believe.

Still, once they get to that point, most creationists don't realize that they've also weakened their position. They will say that the idea of a universe that causes itself is nonsensical, still, they have just now shown that they are capable of believing in things that can be eternal and outside of our notions of time and causality. How do they know the universe isn't eternal? They cannot answer that question in the negative without invoking special pleading. They very argument they craft to prove the necessity of a creator-god can be "solved" by inserting an eternal universe into it, or any other "uncaused" agent.


TL;DR version: that "argument" is basically only good for confirming previously held beliefs, and nothing more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like RobbyPants's post
14-10-2014, 01:50 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
Quote:
"If the atheist were to say that the universe brought itself into existence, then that would be illogical since something that does not exist has no nature; and with no nature, there are no attributes; and with no attributes, actions can’t be performed such as bringing itself into existence. So, that doesn’t work.
"

The slickster asserts "natures" and "attributes" about which he knows nothing and has no proof about what brings things in existence.
So why not assert an all-powerful all-knowing intelligence?

[Image: 9189283.jpg]

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheInquisition's post
14-10-2014, 02:13 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
Quote:You see, whatever has come into existence was caused to come into existence by something else.

Starting off with an unproven assertions is not the best way to begin an argument. The statement assumes that the laws that operate within the universe as we know it apply outside our universe (if outside actually means anything). It also completely disregards the issue that the only thing we've seen that could in any way be called 'coming into existence' involves quantum fluctuations that do not appear to have a cause. Everything else is just re-arranging existing things.

Quote:So, what caused it to come into existence?

Perhaps nothing; quantum fluctuations hint at something from nothing. As Lawrence Krauss puts it, "nothing" may be inherently unstable. Perhaps some kind of multi-verse exists and the laws of cause and effect that we know operate differently there such that it would be normal for universes to be created uncaused. The bottom line is: we don't know, we're looking for evidence.

Quote:If the atheist were to say that the universe brought itself into existence

Since few, if any, atheists actually say that the remainder of the strawman argument is pointless.

Quote:If the atheist said the universe has always existed, that doesn’t work either because that would mean the universe was infinitely old. If it is infinitely old, then why hasn’t it run out of useable energy by now as the 2nd law of thermodynamics would state.

"Always existed" doesn't mean "in the form we see it now". Perhaps the mass/energy always existed and the big bang was just the most recent phase transition. The laws of thermodynamics may only apply since that point.

Quote:Also, in order to get to the present in an infinitely old universe, an infinite amount of time would have to be crossed.

Yet, as WinterWolf hinted at, theists are happy to imagine a god existing in a timeless state and yet able to make decisions which appear to require a timespan in which to make them. Suggesting that the energy of the universe existed in that same timeless state somehow requires explaining an infinite number of events but the mind of god, which is eternal, doesn't. The argument totally bites itself in the ass. Al the hand-waving about it being a 'personal' cause just ignores the fact that the 'person' would be subject to the same problems as the 'impersonal cause'.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
14-10-2014, 02:38 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
The funniest part of the whole article was this:

Quote:The atheists have nothing to offer us with the important issue of explaining how we got here. Atheism can’t answer one of the most important philosophical questions pertaining to our own existence. It is deficient and lacking and at best can offer us only ignorance and guesses.

The irony! Laugh out load

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Impulse's post
14-10-2014, 04:28 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
My position is thus:

1. Nothingness is a non-existence.
2. Something cannot come from a place (nothingness) that does not exist.
3. Therefore, it is impossible for there to have ever been nothingness.
4. Hence, all that exists has always existed in one form (matter, energy, gas, etc) or another and merely changes its form due to numerous factors.
5. The universe is therefore infinite, and never had an origin, and will never have an end. Hence, all matter, energy etc in the universe cannot be measured, as it is also infinite.
6. The Big Bang happened, but it is not the origin of existence. It is merely one in an innumerable series of explosions that regularly occur throughout an endless and infinite universe. "This has all happened before, and this will all happen again."

I have no problem accepting what my position states above.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2014, 05:00 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
Atheism is not a religion and it is not a science. It is not a philosophy, nor is it an understanding. It is not a thought, It is not faith. It not a belief and it is not stance.

Atheism is nothing more than the disbelief in the supernatural.

Period.

That is it.

That is all it ever has been, is today, and always will be.

The End.

Do not confuse Atheism with an Atheist! That is quite different.

The job of discovering where everything came from and how it works, why and where its all going is the job of SCIENCE!

Science is not a anything that I mentioned above either. It is also not a disbelief. It is a "process" in which we use as a tool to discover the how,what,when,where,why,because, etc. Of how and OF everything in the universe.

Nothing more, nothing less.

The End.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Shadow Fox's post
14-10-2014, 07:42 PM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
(14-10-2014 01:23 PM)fidel_cashflow Wrote:  Atheism has nothing to say about existence, so there is no failure.

I respectfully disagree. I, as an atheist, believe that our existence has been brought about by a complex series of spontaneous, cataclysmic events that our beyond our scientific understanding at the moment.

Religion makes unsubstantiated, unprovable claims. That is a failure.
Agreed.

Atheism is ONLY the stance one one subject. Do you believe there is a god? It has nothing to do with anything else, including but not limited to: evolution, origins of the universe, morality, the obvious superiority of of the 1967 Impala over all automobiles.

You can be an atheist and believe the universe was created by a unicorn, they are totally unrelated topics.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 07:11 AM
RE: "The failure of Atheism to account for existence"
(14-10-2014 01:30 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(14-10-2014 01:26 PM)pablo Wrote:  Atheism in and of itself makes no claims. You, as an atheist are free to personally have any opinions you wish aside from atheism. They are not one and the same.

Yeah I'm with Pablo here. I know atheists who believe in aliens and ghosts and think that's what " created" the universe. They also dismiss evolution by natural selection.

They just don't believe in god(s).

is Buddhism and Raelism the best example ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: