Why do atheists become atheists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-01-2015, 01:37 PM (This post was last modified: 17-01-2015 02:06 PM by Free.)
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 01:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  No, YOU have a belief that God does not exist.

I state as absolute fact, "God does not exist."

If you are not 7.0, you are harboring the belief that it is possible that god exists. If you had no doubts whatsoever that God did not exist, you would be 7.0

Tongue

Nope. Being a 7.0 requires knowledge. That is knowledge you do not have.

Yes I do, and here is how you can also know. Listed below are the tools you need to utilize to come to the "knowledge" that God does not exist:

Tools:


Negative Proof

A common saying in pseudologic is "You can't prove a negative." That saying is not true. An absence of something can be proved in various ways, e.g., by a reductio ad absurdum or by proving something else that is inconsistent with the presence of that something (a very useful approach known in mathematics as proof by contradiction).

For example, in law, a party may have the burden of proving nonreceipt of certain correspondence and may bear that burden of proof (at least by a preponderance of the evidence) by introducing into evidence a docket record in which the correspondence would have been noted. In mathematics, there are plenty of proofs of negative propositions, such as "there is no largest prime number"[1] or "there is no rational square root of 2".[2] One might also note that the saying itself is a negative.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof


Evidence of Absence

Evidence of absence is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence


Modus Tollens

The argument has two premises. The first premise is a conditional or "if-then" statement, for example that if P then Q. The second premise is that it is not the case that Q . From these two premises, it can be logically concluded that it is not the case that P.

Consider an example:

If the watch-dog detects an intruder, the watch-dog will bark.
The watch-dog did not bark
Therefore, no intruder was detected by the watch-dog.

Supposing that the premises are both true (the dog will bark if it detects an intruder, and does indeed not bark), it follows that no intruder has been detected. This is a valid argument since it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. (It is conceivable that there may have been an intruder that the dog did not detect, but that does not invalidate the argument; the first premise is "if the watch-dog detects an intruder." The thing of importance is that the dog detects or doesn't detect an intruder, not if there is one.)


Another example:

If I am the axe murderer, then I can use an axe.
I cannot use an axe.
Therefore, I am not the axe murderer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens


Propositional calculus

Also called propositional logic, sentential calculus, or sentential logic is the branch of mathematical logic concerned with the study of propositions (whether they are true or false) and formed by other propositions with the use of logical connectives, and how their value depends on the truth value of their components. Logical connectives are found in natural languages. In English for example, some examples are "and" (conjunction), "or" (disjunction), "not” (negation) and "if" (but only when used to denote material conditional).

The following is an example of a very simple inference within the scope of propositional logic:

Premise 1: If it's raining then it's cloudy.
Premise 2: It's raining.
Conclusion: It's cloudy.
Both premises and the conclusions are propositions. The premises are taken for granted and then with the application of modus ponens (an inference rule) the conclusion follows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

Once you employ those tools to the argument, there is no other conclusion possible other than God does not exist.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 02:43 PM (This post was last modified: 17-01-2015 05:49 PM by true scotsman.)
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
Free,

I am in agreement with you. I too know that there are no gods. We do not have any obligation to disprove every arbitrary claim. This notion that we can never be sure is a call to perpetual skepticism. We do not need to turn over every rock in every corner of the universe in order to find evidence for something that doesn't exist.

The fact is there is zero evidence of gods and the idea of gods contradicts incontestable truths that we do know. Therefore gods are impossible.

Edited: I had originally written perceptual when I meant to write perpetual.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
17-01-2015, 03:25 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 02:43 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Free,

I am in agreement with you. I too know that there are no gods. We do not have any obligation to disprove every arbitrary claim. This notion that we can never be sure is a call to perceptual skepticism. We do not need to turn over every rock in every corner of the universe in order to find evidence for something that doesn't exist.

The fact is there is zero evidence of gods and the idea of gods contradicts incontestable truths that we do know. Therefore gods are impossible.

Thank you. It's good to see other 7.0 atheists understanding the reasoning and logic behind the determination of both existence and non existence.

Thumbsup

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 04:41 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 01:37 PM)Free Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 01:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  Nope. Being a 7.0 requires knowledge. That is knowledge you do not have.

Yes I do, and here is how you can also know. Listed below are the tools you need to utilize to come to the "knowledge" that God does not exist:

Tools:


Negative Proof

A common saying in pseudologic is "You can't prove a negative." That saying is not true. An absence of something can be proved in various ways, e.g., by a reductio ad absurdum or by proving something else that is inconsistent with the presence of that something (a very useful approach known in mathematics as proof by contradiction).

For example, in law, a party may have the burden of proving nonreceipt of certain correspondence and may bear that burden of proof (at least by a preponderance of the evidence) by introducing into evidence a docket record in which the correspondence would have been noted. In mathematics, there are plenty of proofs of negative propositions, such as "there is no largest prime number"[1] or "there is no rational square root of 2".[2] One might also note that the saying itself is a negative.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof


Evidence of Absence

Evidence of absence is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence


Modus Tollens

The argument has two premises. The first premise is a conditional or "if-then" statement, for example that if P then Q. The second premise is that it is not the case that Q . From these two premises, it can be logically concluded that it is not the case that P.

Consider an example:

If the watch-dog detects an intruder, the watch-dog will bark.
The watch-dog did not bark
Therefore, no intruder was detected by the watch-dog.

Supposing that the premises are both true (the dog will bark if it detects an intruder, and does indeed not bark), it follows that no intruder has been detected. This is a valid argument since it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. (It is conceivable that there may have been an intruder that the dog did not detect, but that does not invalidate the argument; the first premise is "if the watch-dog detects an intruder." The thing of importance is that the dog detects or doesn't detect an intruder, not if there is one.)


Another example:

If I am the axe murderer, then I can use an axe.
I cannot use an axe.
Therefore, I am not the axe murderer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens


Propositional calculus

Also called propositional logic, sentential calculus, or sentential logic is the branch of mathematical logic concerned with the study of propositions (whether they are true or false) and formed by other propositions with the use of logical connectives, and how their value depends on the truth value of their components. Logical connectives are found in natural languages. In English for example, some examples are "and" (conjunction), "or" (disjunction), "not” (negation) and "if" (but only when used to denote material conditional).

The following is an example of a very simple inference within the scope of propositional logic:

Premise 1: If it's raining then it's cloudy.
Premise 2: It's raining.
Conclusion: It's cloudy.
Both premises and the conclusions are propositions. The premises are taken for granted and then with the application of modus ponens (an inference rule) the conclusion follows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

Once you employ those tools to the argument, there is no other conclusion possible other than God does not exist.

Please present your proof that there could not possibly be a deity that initiated the Big Bang.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 04:42 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  No, YOU have a belief that God does not exist.
If you ask me if I believe that there is no god, my answer would be no.
I disbelieve the idea of gods but I have no evidence against them so I hold no belief in their lack of existence. I am a 6.

(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  I state as absolute fact, "God does not exist."
But it isn't a fact. You have no supporting evidence for your claim.

You cannot provide evidence to support your claim.

You have a belief.


(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  If you are not 7.0, you are harboring the belief that it is possible that god exists.
No, this is not true.
I am of the position that I don't know if gods are possible or not.
I don't even think the term "god" has been defined well enough to assess the possibility.
I'm an ignostic agnostic atheist. Totally without belief.

(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  If you had no doubts whatsoever that God did not exist, you would be 7.0
It's not a matter of doubts.

It's a matter of evidence. There isn't any evidence either way. So I go about my life, without doubt, without worry. If you provide me with some evidence then I might be interested enough to look at it, but until there is evidence there is no reason to worry or doubt or wonder.

Maybe gods exist, maybe they don't. IDK.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
17-01-2015, 04:53 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 04:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 01:37 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes I do, and here is how you can also know. Listed below are the tools you need to utilize to come to the "knowledge" that God does not exist:

Tools:


Negative Proof

A common saying in pseudologic is "You can't prove a negative." That saying is not true. An absence of something can be proved in various ways, e.g., by a reductio ad absurdum or by proving something else that is inconsistent with the presence of that something (a very useful approach known in mathematics as proof by contradiction).

For example, in law, a party may have the burden of proving nonreceipt of certain correspondence and may bear that burden of proof (at least by a preponderance of the evidence) by introducing into evidence a docket record in which the correspondence would have been noted. In mathematics, there are plenty of proofs of negative propositions, such as "there is no largest prime number"[1] or "there is no rational square root of 2".[2] One might also note that the saying itself is a negative.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof


Evidence of Absence

Evidence of absence is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence


Modus Tollens

The argument has two premises. The first premise is a conditional or "if-then" statement, for example that if P then Q. The second premise is that it is not the case that Q . From these two premises, it can be logically concluded that it is not the case that P.

Consider an example:

If the watch-dog detects an intruder, the watch-dog will bark.
The watch-dog did not bark
Therefore, no intruder was detected by the watch-dog.

Supposing that the premises are both true (the dog will bark if it detects an intruder, and does indeed not bark), it follows that no intruder has been detected. This is a valid argument since it is not possible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. (It is conceivable that there may have been an intruder that the dog did not detect, but that does not invalidate the argument; the first premise is "if the watch-dog detects an intruder." The thing of importance is that the dog detects or doesn't detect an intruder, not if there is one.)


Another example:

If I am the axe murderer, then I can use an axe.
I cannot use an axe.
Therefore, I am not the axe murderer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens


Propositional calculus

Also called propositional logic, sentential calculus, or sentential logic is the branch of mathematical logic concerned with the study of propositions (whether they are true or false) and formed by other propositions with the use of logical connectives, and how their value depends on the truth value of their components. Logical connectives are found in natural languages. In English for example, some examples are "and" (conjunction), "or" (disjunction), "not” (negation) and "if" (but only when used to denote material conditional).

The following is an example of a very simple inference within the scope of propositional logic:

Premise 1: If it's raining then it's cloudy.
Premise 2: It's raining.
Conclusion: It's cloudy.
Both premises and the conclusions are propositions. The premises are taken for granted and then with the application of modus ponens (an inference rule) the conclusion follows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

Once you employ those tools to the argument, there is no other conclusion possible other than God does not exist.

Please present your proof that there could not possibly be a deity that initiated the Big Bang.

Easy.

God does not exist.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 04:55 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 04:42 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  No, YOU have a belief that God does not exist.
If you ask me if I believe that there is no god, my answer would be no.
I disbelieve the idea of gods but I have no evidence against them so I hold no belief in their lack of existence. I am a 6.

(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  I state as absolute fact, "God does not exist."
But it isn't a fact. You have no supporting evidence for your claim.

You cannot provide evidence to support your claim.

You have a belief.


(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  If you are not 7.0, you are harboring the belief that it is possible that god exists.
No, this is not true.
I am of the position that I don't know if gods are possible or not.
I don't even think the term "god" has been defined well enough to assess the possibility.
I'm an ignostic agnostic atheist. Totally without belief.

(17-01-2015 12:19 PM)Free Wrote:  If you had no doubts whatsoever that God did not exist, you would be 7.0
It's not a matter of doubts.

It's a matter of evidence. There isn't any evidence either way. So I go about my life, without doubt, without worry. If you provide me with some evidence then I might be interested enough to look at it, but until there is evidence there is no reason to worry or doubt or wonder.

Maybe gods exist, maybe they don't. IDK.

I do know.

Evidence has been supplied. I cannot force anybody to understand why the evidence is in fact evidence. That is something you will need to learn on your own.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 04:56 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 04:53 PM)Free Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 04:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  Please present your proof that there could not possibly be a deity that initiated the Big Bang.

Easy.

God does not exist.

That's not a proof, just another opinion.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
17-01-2015, 04:57 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 04:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 04:53 PM)Free Wrote:  Easy.

God does not exist.

That's not a proof, just another opinion.

It's been proven. Whether you agree or not will not change that fact.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2015, 04:58 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(17-01-2015 04:55 PM)Free Wrote:  
(17-01-2015 04:42 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If you ask me if I believe that there is no god, my answer would be no.
I disbelieve the idea of gods but I have no evidence against them so I hold no belief in their lack of existence. I am a 6.

But it isn't a fact. You have no supporting evidence for your claim.

You cannot provide evidence to support your claim.

You have a belief.


No, this is not true.
I am of the position that I don't know if gods are possible or not.
I don't even think the term "god" has been defined well enough to assess the possibility.
I'm an ignostic agnostic atheist. Totally without belief.

It's not a matter of doubts.

It's a matter of evidence. There isn't any evidence either way. So I go about my life, without doubt, without worry. If you provide me with some evidence then I might be interested enough to look at it, but until there is evidence there is no reason to worry or doubt or wonder.

Maybe gods exist, maybe they don't. IDK.

I do know.

Evidence has been supplied. I cannot force anybody to understand why the evidence is in fact evidence. That is something you will need to learn on your own.

What you fail to understand is that the evidence is not proof. Do you not understand what proof entails?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: