QwertyuiopThePie
Premiumfag
Trying too hard since 1853 BC.
[F4:qwertyuiop95]
Posts: 224
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 21, 2012 20:29:44 GMT -5
Basically, a more fancy name for a "Does God exist?" thread, but including more than just the Judeo-Christian god. Any opinions?
|
|
|
Post by Draxor on Jun 21, 2012 20:38:16 GMT -5
I'll believe anything that science can prove possible. And at the moment, atheism is on that list...
|
|
|
Post by M4 on Jun 21, 2012 20:43:46 GMT -5
Science has not been able to prove atheism. Or god.
|
|
priok
Babby
LICHT
Posts: 52
|
Post by priok on Jun 21, 2012 20:44:47 GMT -5
I think that he exists, the proof that is he has sent electrodes into people's bodies to prove who he really is speaking to. There is also proof in water found on other planets, because a god can really just be a thing we do not expect. It does not have to be embodied by any humanoid thing.
|
|
nmagane
Banned
im gay %7C ur mom %7C 420.smoke.weed %7C ~Nigga 4 Lyfe~ %7C hi dad %7C metal sucks
I Am A Proud Neckbeard Come at Me Hater.[F4:tonsofdicks]
Posts: 459
|
Post by nmagane on Jun 26, 2012 8:14:06 GMT -5
I don't think we will ever know, I just hope people who are extremely anti-religion (you know who i'm talking about) would chill a bit.
|
|
QwertyuiopThePie
Premiumfag
Trying too hard since 1853 BC.
[F4:qwertyuiop95]
Posts: 224
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 26, 2012 11:34:07 GMT -5
Actually, I don't. I know nobody that is extremely anti-religion when it doesn't interfere. Personally, I don't care less what people believe as long as it isn't being shoved in my face. The main issue is that it almost always IS shoved in my face.
Atheism is inherently unprovable. Proving atheism is like proving unicorns don't exist. It's proof of nonexistence, and it's impossible. As such the default assumption between existence and nonexistence when neither has proof is towards nonexistence. It is existence that has the burden of proof, and so far all I've seen is them shirking it.
|
|
|
Post by GGoodie on Jun 26, 2012 19:23:00 GMT -5
Atheism is inherently unprovable. Proving atheism is like proving unicorns don't exist. It's proof of nonexistence, and it's impossible. As such the default assumption between existence and nonexistence when neither has proof is towards nonexistence. It is existence that has the burden of proof, and so far all I've seen is them shirking it. That's silly. You definitely can prove that things don't exist. For example, I can prove that a triangle can't have sides measuring 3 inches, 5 inches, and 100 inches. The burden of proof lies on those making claims, not on those making claims of existence. If I said a god doesn't exist, then the burden of proof lies on me. If you told me a god exists, than it is reasonable for me to expect proof. However, if I turn around and say that that god does not exist, then the burden of proof fails on my shoulders as well. Theists and Atheists (As popularly defined as the position that no god exists) both have a burden of proof. Only agnostics (as popularly defined) escape the burden of proof, because they make no claim as to the existence of a deity. They simply refute the claims of others. However, if you meant Atheism as in "not theism", meaning that agnosticism is included, then this whole post refuted nothing
|
|
QwertyuiopThePie
Premiumfag
Trying too hard since 1853 BC.
[F4:qwertyuiop95]
Posts: 224
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 26, 2012 19:46:45 GMT -5
I don't mean logical impossibilities. I mean things that theoretically could exist but have no evidence, like fairies. I know no gnostic atheists, which are the only ones that require the burden of proof as you say. Most atheists are, in fact, agnostic atheists, which means that they hold God in about the same regard as Santa Claus.
|
|
|
Post by GGoodie on Jun 26, 2012 21:11:08 GMT -5
Yea when I got done with my post I realized you probably meant atheism as the blanket term for nonbelievers, not strong/gnostic atheists. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by Listwich on Jul 11, 2012 11:05:11 GMT -5
In response to Draxor, Science hasn't proven atheism. If you want to go with what we can't prove, You should try being Agnostic. (I don't know there is a god and we may never know because we can't prove it)
|
|
|
Post by aaa on Jul 11, 2012 15:37:35 GMT -5
a creator is entirely possible. the universe just 'starting' is a long shot. but then again that brings up the argument of infinite gods, all creators need a creator.
|
|
nmagane
Banned
im gay %7C ur mom %7C 420.smoke.weed %7C ~Nigga 4 Lyfe~ %7C hi dad %7C metal sucks
I Am A Proud Neckbeard Come at Me Hater.[F4:tonsofdicks]
Posts: 459
|
Post by nmagane on Jul 11, 2012 15:40:07 GMT -5
i dont think it does? religion says that the creator was already there nothing created the creator he was just............. already there
|
|
Dhoom
Premiumfag
Posts: 6
|
Post by Dhoom on Jul 12, 2012 15:27:56 GMT -5
Atheism is pro. Theism is pro. Just believe whatever you think is right~_~
|
|
|
Post by Listwich on Jul 12, 2012 16:04:13 GMT -5
Atheism is pro. Theism is pro. Just believe whatever you think is right~_~ Yes, this is good. Although the topic of the thread might not be which is better, but which is right. In which case, I'm just going to say we can't know. Is easier than any debate we could get into. Because if there was a right one, that would be what everyone would believe in.
|
|
QwertyuiopThePie
Premiumfag
Trying too hard since 1853 BC.
[F4:qwertyuiop95]
Posts: 224
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 12, 2012 21:39:36 GMT -5
Not necessarily true. Something being correct does not imply that everyone would believe in it. Consider the round earth in the days of the cavemen.
|
|