Your Favorite God Argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-03-2013, 05:09 AM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
I like the one where Alvin Plantinga disproves naturalism. He starts by assuming for the sake of argument that we are an evolved species. Then he deduces from the process of evolution that our reasoning only needs to be good enough to survive. It need to not be actually accurate. If we evolved, our cognition is likely to have all sorts of weird blind spots that are fine if you just want to survive but don't help you get to truth. He concludes that we are actually nothing like that and have perfect designed cognition not that crappy evolved cognition that would allow anyone to believe the terrible argument he is making. Therefore God.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 05:37 AM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
(30-03-2013 05:09 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  I like the one where Alvin Plantinga disproves naturalism. He starts by assuming for the sake of argument that we are an evolved species. Then he deduces from the process of evolution that our reasoning only needs to be good enough to survive. It need to not be actually accurate. If we evolved, our cognition is likely to have all sorts of weird blind spots that are fine if you just want to survive but don't help you get to truth. He concludes that we are actually nothing like that and have perfect designed cognition not that crappy evolved cognition that would allow anyone to believe the terrible argument he is making. Therefore God.


Excellent argument. Research shows that we do, in fact, have a crappy evolved intelligence full of blind spots and subject to errors of many kinds.

Evolution for the win.Thumbsup

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
30-03-2013, 07:11 AM (This post was last modified: 30-03-2013 09:48 AM by Julius.)
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
I like the "Fine Tuning" argument the best, for it is so easy to debunk.

Look...if the universe was so fine-tuned for life, then why is at least 99.9999999% of the universe utterly hostile to life or anything that life requires? The vast majority of the universe is nothing but empty, cold and deadly space and even the space of the universe is increasing at a rate faster than the speed of light. The universe is hostile to life, and getting more hostile moment by moment. In the time it has taken to write this response, at least a cubic lightyear of cold, empty space has been added to the universe - a cubic lightyear of utter hostility!

It's a scientific fact that the universe is a hostile place, and it's only going to get worse.

Some fucking Fine Tuning!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 10:45 AM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
I love all arguments for gods, for they can all be reduced to logical fallacies.

<3

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Elesjei's post
30-03-2013, 11:55 AM (This post was last modified: 30-03-2013 12:11 PM by cufflink.)
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
My favorite is the so-called Ontological Argument, which goes back to Anselm in the 11th century. It's bullshit, of course, but at least it makes you stop and think, "Where exactly does this go wrong?" And it's apparently taken in some pretty heavy philosophical hitters, including for a short time the young Bertrand Russell.

The OA claims to prove the existence of God a priori--that is, purely through logical reasoning, without in any way having to take a look at what the world is really like. One version goes like this:

Whether or not God exists, we can certainly have the idea of God. And a key part of that idea is that God is perfect. In fact, he (she, it) is the most perfect being we can conceive of. There is no being more perfect than God. Call that conceived being G.

So the question is, does G exist or not?

Well, suppose not. In that case, we can conceive of another being, G', who has all the attributes of G but also exists! But surely a perfect being that exists is more perfect than such a being that does not exist. So G' is more perfect than G.

But now we've run into a contradiction. We started by saying that G was the most perfect being that could be conceived of, but now we're saying there's something else, G', that's more perfect than G. So we have to toss out what led us to this contradiction, namely that G does not exist.

Therefore G exists. QED. Big Grin

For anyone who's interested, much more info here.

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cufflink's post
30-03-2013, 12:04 PM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
My favorite is the one that doesn't contain any fallacies....


Oh wait....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Simon Moon's post
30-03-2013, 12:15 PM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
(30-03-2013 11:55 AM)cufflink Wrote:  My favorite is the so-called Ontological Argument, which goes back to Anselm in the 11th century. It's bullshit, of course, but at least it makes you stop and think, "Where exactly does this go wrong?" And it's apparently taken in some pretty heavy philosophical hitters, including for a short time the young Bertrand Russell.

The OA claims to prove the existence of God a priori--that is, purely through logical reasoning, without in any way having to take a look at what the world is really like. One version goes like this:

Whether or not God exists, we can certainly have the idea of God. And a key part of that idea is that God is perfect. In fact, he (she, it) is the most perfect being we can conceive of. There is no being more perfect than God. Call that conceived being G.

So the question is, does G exist or not?

Well, suppose not. In that case, we can conceive of another being, G', who has all the attributes of G but also exists! But surely a perfect being that exists is more perfect than such a being that does not exist. So G' is more perfect than G.

But now we've run into a contradiction. We started by saying that G was the most perfect being that could be conceived of, but now we're saying there's something else, G', that's more perfect than G. So we have to toss out what led us to this contradiction, namely that G does not exist.

Therefore G exists. QED. Big Grin

For anyone who's interested, much more info here.

Looks like I almost stumbled upon that one when I converted (post 85)
Laugh out load

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vera's post
30-03-2013, 02:15 PM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
Yoga pants definetly, only god could create such a perfect piece of clothes. Tongue

In all honesty i don't know if there is one. But the arguments about morality are the hardest to refute for me. It usually means a bunch of guilt trips about how i can't say hitler was wrong and how subjective morality means everyone is right. Is truly frustrating.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 02:23 PM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
(30-03-2013 02:15 PM)Techgorilla Wrote:  Yoga pants definetly, only god could create such a perfect piece of clothes. Tongue

In all honesty i don't know if there is one. But the arguments about morality are the hardest to refute for me. It usually means a bunch of guilt trips about how i can't say hitler was wrong and how subjective morality means everyone is right. Is truly frustrating.


What's to say that morality has to be subjective just because an invisible, homicidal, genocidal, misanthropic, misogynistic, sadistic, self aggrandizing megalomaniac didn't invent them?

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bbeljefe's post
30-03-2013, 02:27 PM
RE: Your Favorite God Argument
(30-03-2013 02:15 PM)Techgorilla Wrote:  Yoga pants definetly, only god could create such a perfect piece of clothes. Tongue

In all honesty i don't know if there is one. But the arguments about morality are the hardest to refute for me. It usually means a bunch of guilt trips about how i can't say hitler was wrong and how subjective morality means everyone is right. Is truly frustrating.

Ultimatly that subjective morality deffense falls apart if you keep pressing them on their dogma. I like staying with Thou shalt not kill until they are unable to spin any more. It just takes being more determined than the oposition (I'll admit that it can be frustrating)

Generaly this is my deffense for such an attack "All morality is subjective." Their response *Something about hitler ussualy with a hollacaust mention" Me: "So killing Hitler was wrong then? Thou shalt not kill, not thou shalt not kill unless it's Hitler." Just keep hammering em with this line and eventualy they throw their hands up because they have no grounds to stand on. Morality is subjective it depends mostly on culture and circumstance. Non-subjective morality is a scary prospect.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: