Atheism is DEAD!

Michael Hardner · December 16, 2009

What do you suppose the chances are that there is a God, Mr. Hardner? Do you believe there is an even 50/50 split?

I don't know. I'm not-knowing, or a-gnostic.

cybercoma · December 16, 2009

I don't know. I'm not-knowing, or a-gnostic.

I know you don't know for sure, no one does, even though the faithful claim they do. I'm asking you, based on what you do know, and what you're capable of knowing, what do you suppose the chances are? I'm not tricking you into anything. I'm just curious what your opinion is.

Michael Hardner · December 16, 2009

I know you don't know for sure, no one does, even though the faithful claim they do. I'm asking you, based on what you do know, and what you're capable of knowing, what do you suppose the chances are? I'm not tricking you into anything. I'm just curious what your opinion is.

It's not something you can put a guess to. I honestly have no idea. If there's any kind of afterlife, then I would be happy but I haven't experienced anything first-hand, or through research that indicates it's so. I'd have to say I don't think it's likely but it's a tower-of-babel type of problem.

jbg · December 16, 2009

Jesus is dead. Get over it!

Jesus was a great Jew who had a lot of great things to say. He was not the son of G-d or the Messiah, agreed.

cybercoma · December 16, 2009

It's not something you can put a guess to. I honestly have no idea. If there's any kind of afterlife, then I would be happy but I haven't experienced anything first-hand, or through research that indicates it's so. I'd have to say I don't think it's likely but it's a tower-of-babel type of problem.

I was just interested in how you look at it. That's all. I'm not going to make any judgments about your opinion.

Jesus was a great Jew who had a lot of great things to say. He was not the son of G-d or the Messiah, agreed.

Hey look! We agree on something.

Shwa · December 16, 2009

But he hasn't demonstrated it. He claimed it, there is a huge difference. Especially since the universe can be the universe without it being a supernatural being.

You'd have to take that up with him.

Actually, he has claimed his definition of God. He didn't say anything about a supernatural being. The universe can be demonstrated as existant, so his God must also exist. Some people do pick tree or rocks. I suppose they want something tangible to believe in, since belief is generally easier than faith.

Shwa · December 16, 2009

I'm an agnostic. I believe that it's very highly improbable that God exists. So improbable that for all intents and purposes I believe God does not exist. Should evidence to the contrary arise, I will re-evaluate my position. Until them, I'm an atheist.

Sounds like you are not agnostic, once you believe that evidence may change your opinion you cannot be agnostic, an agnostic doesn't believe rational knowledge of God, one way or another is possible.

I think the keyword here is "possible." Question: do you believe in God?

Typical responses:

Atheist - No.

Agnostic - Dunno.

Theist - Yes.

I was thinking of taking a scratch poll here at work, but then it is tough to find atheists at Christmas time, the agnostics will just ignore me and I don't want to risk the chance of opening a door to an evangelical rant.

Mr.Canada · December 16, 2009

I doubt anyone would waste their time with a evangelical rant. No one really changes anyone's mind on these forums or any other forum for that matter. Political forums are usually just contests to see who can yell the loudest.

That's why I post the way I do.

cybercoma · December 16, 2009

I would like to poll agnostics and see, when pressed, what they they think the chances are that a God or gods exist. I don't know is such a lazy answer. Sure, you can't say for certain that anything doesn't exist. I can't say for certain that little pink unicorns, invisible to the naked eye, or any imaging technology we have, don't exist in Central Park in New York; however, I can say chances are so remote that I until I see compelling evidence to the contrary, I'm going to go right ahead and presume they don't exist. Same goes for God. The default position is not, I don't know here. It's much less likely that God exists, think of the theodicy problem, than otherwise.

Edited December 16, 2009 by cybercoma

Riverwind · December 16, 2009

I don't know is such a lazy answer. Sure, you can't say for certain that anything doesn't exist.

How about I don't care? I suspect most agnostics feel that the existence/non-existence of a deity is an irrelevant point. That is also why many agnostics see atheists/theists as two sides of the same coin - both groups place way too much importance on what is ultimately an unverifiable opinion. Edited December 16, 2009 by Riverwind

M.Dancer · December 16, 2009

But I consider myself an Agnostic Christian, because I believe that an Atheist is someone who believes firmly there is NO God.

My wife and I had to visit the Priest (Fahter Massive Beer Gut) at Holy Rosary about the Christining of our son. He asks me why I am nota member of the parish (my wife is). I said I was an agnostic christion (and explained why) He said that was imposible to be a Christian without signing on to the package. I said I was living proof to the contrary and my wife kicked me to shut up.

M.Dancer · December 16, 2009

The universe can be demonstrated as existant, so his God must also exist.

Sounds too tautological for me to consider seriously.

Michael Hardner · December 16, 2009

... my wife kicked me to shut up.

Not the first time, I'm guessing... :lol:

kimmy · December 16, 2009

How about I don't care? I suspect most agnostics feel that the existence/non-existence of a deity is an irrelevant point. That is also why many agnostics see atheists/theists as two sides of the same coin - both groups place way too much importance on what is ultimately an unverifiable opinion.

Sometimes, an agnostic is just an atheist who got sick of arguing.

-k

Edited December 16, 2009 by kimmy

GostHacked · December 16, 2009

I would like to poll agnostics and see, when pressed, what they they think the chances are that a God or gods exist. I don't know is such a lazy answer.

It really is not a lazy answer. It is the correct answer for agnostics. For example, in my field of work, saying 'I don't know' is much better than, 'sure I'll be able to fix it' then failing. Saying "I don't know' can save much embarrassment in the future.

Sure, you can't say for certain that anything doesn't exist. I can't say for certain that little pink unicorns, invisible to the naked eye, or any imaging technology we have, don't exist in Central Park in New York; however, I can say chances are so remote that I until I see compelling evidence to the contrary, I'm going to go right ahead and presume they don't exist. Same goes for God. The default position is not, I don't know here. It's much less likely that God exists, think of the theodicy problem, than otherwise.

Much less likely, but in the end, you still are just guessing and you end up with 'I don't know' eventually.

Riverwind

How about I don't care? I suspect most agnostics feel that the existence/non-existence of a deity is an irrelevant point. That is also why many agnostics see atheists/theists as two sides of the same coin - both groups place way too much importance on what is ultimately an unverifiable opinion.

I can get behind this.

M.Dancer · December 16, 2009

Much less likely, but in the end, you still are just guessing and you end up with 'I don't know' eventually.

I can say for certain that 2+2=4. I can say for certain that 2+2 does not equal 3.

I can say for certain that the Solstice happens this year on the 21st around 5:47 PM

I can say for certain that the Solstice will not be on the 22.

For an atheist, wild conjecture of a divinity requires no consideration...if forced to answer the probability question, based on observable evidence, the answer will always be no, as in there is no reason to believe otherwise.

for the atheist, it is simple as that

ToadBrother · December 16, 2009

But the hypothetical atheist still has to answer the hypothetical question: do you believe in God?

And the answer would be, for me, there is no evidence for such a being. Provide evidence, and I'll consider. I lack any belief. It's not a positive statement of opinion, simply an invocation of the Null Hypothesis.

There are millions of people who demonstrate daily that their claim of the existance of God is true.

And this is relevant how? Millions of people believe all sorts of things. Reality is not dictated by a democracy of opinions.

Null Hypothesis suggests that the question hasn't been considered.

Oh come on. The question has been asked one way or the other for thousands of years. At any rate, the Null Hypothesis suggests nothing, in and of itself, other than that claims require evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and in the absence of evidence, there is no particular logical and objective reason to accept a claim.

The point being is that we can philosophize, but it is a rare person indeed, in our society, who has not had the God-concept question in their lifetime. For instance, Maple_Leafs182 defines God as the Universe. I doubt even the most ardent atheist could argue that very well.

MapleLeaf's definition is meaningless. You might as well say God is a peanut butter and jelly sandwich or God is the Hoover Dam. You can't argue against that sort of a definition because the definition is devoid of content. It's just cheap New Age thinking, the kind of Deepak Chopra nonsense that some people seem to regard as deep, when in fact it's so shallow it's hard to even call it one-dimensional thinking.

Edited December 16, 2009 by ToadBrother

ToadBrother · December 16, 2009

I would like to poll agnostics and see, when pressed, what they they think the chances are that a God or gods exist. I don't know is such a lazy answer. Sure, you can't say for certain that anything doesn't exist. I can't say for certain that little pink unicorns, invisible to the naked eye, or any imaging technology we have, don't exist in Central Park in New York; however, I can say chances are so remote that I until I see compelling evidence to the contrary, I'm going to go right ahead and presume they don't exist. Same goes for God. The default position is not, I don't know here. It's much less likely that God exists, think of the theodicy problem, than otherwise.

How can calculate the odds on such a thing? This is simply nothing more than a variant of the "angel's on a head of a pin" question. I mean, what are the odds that your left ear is home to a civilization of tiny invisible faeries?

GostHacked · December 16, 2009

I can say for certain that 2+2=4. I can say for certain that 2+2 does not equal 3.

I can say for certain that the Solstice happens this year on the 21st around 5:47 PM

I can say for certain that the Solstice will not be on the 22.

For an atheist, wild conjecture of a divinity requires no consideration...if forced to answer the probability question, based on observable evidence, the answer will always be no, as in there is no reason to believe otherwise.

for the atheist, it is simple as that

For a believer it is about as simple as that as well. Even simpler because there is no math involved !!

Shwa · December 16, 2009

...there is no evidence for such a being.

That is interesting.

Some people believe that God - or the evidence of God - is simply a matter of definition, such as Maple_Leafs182. Others, and I have heard this often, believe that a fundamental conception of God is present in everyone.

What is interesting that you would write, "...such a being..." and then trample all over Maple_Leafs182 because his defintion does not synch up with yours or what you think a decent definition should be in order for you to consider it.

Hmmmm...

ToadBrother · December 16, 2009

That is interesting.

Some people believe that God - or the evidence of God - is simply a matter of definition, such as Maple_Leafs182. Others, and I have heard this often, believe that a fundamental conception of God is present in everyone.

Some people believe all sorts of things. If I define purple invisible massless monkeys as beings that live in your armpits, does that mean I get a free pass on having to provide actual evidence?

What is interesting that you would write, "...such a being..." and then trample all over Maple_Leafs182 because his defintion does not synch up with yours or what you think a decent definition should be in order for you to consider it.

Hmmmm...

His definition is meaningless. Here's a test of a definition of an alleged entity or phenomena. Does it have any utility whatsoever? How does it differentiate from other competing claims?

Saying "God is the universe" does not pass that muster. It's a feel-good t-shirt slogan, not a logically defendable position.

cybercoma · December 17, 2009

It really is not a lazy answer. It is the correct answer for agnostics.

Does Santa exist? Does the Easter bunny exist? Do leprechauns exist? Does the Loch Ness monster exist? Do aliens exist? Does the tooth fairy exist?

Let me guess.

I don't know.

???

cybercoma · December 17, 2009

How can calculate the odds on such a thing? This is simply nothing more than a variant of the "angel's on a head of a pin" question. I mean, what are the odds that your left ear is home to a civilization of tiny invisible faeries?

Consider what you know and the evidence and come to a conclusion. It's as easy as that.

M.Dancer · December 17, 2009

Does Santa exist? Does the Easter bunny exist? Do leprechauns exist? Does the Loch Ness monster exist? Do aliens exist? Does the tooth fairy exist?

There's a difference..the provenance of those do not go back to distant primordial times nor do people generally have deeply personal spirtitual experiances with leprechauns.

cybercoma · December 17, 2009

Some people believe all sorts of things. If I define purple invisible massless monkeys as beings that live in your armpits, does that mean I get a free pass on having to provide actual evidence?

This isn't a problem in and of itself. Of course you should get a free pass to believe that; however, people justifiably ought to believe you're nuts. Now, when you demand your belief about purple invisible massless armpit monkeys creating the universe is taught on equal footing with evolution in science texts and classrooms, there is a problem and you ought not to get a free pass. In that case, you ought to provide evidence for your claims. When you say those purple monkeys command us not to allow gay marriage, you ought to back up those claims. When you say those purple monkeys don't want people conducting life saving research because they think stem cells are sacred, you ought to back up those claims. When you make your wife dress head to toe in a thick black garment, cutting off her peripheral vision, and making be accompanied by a man everywhere in public because it pleases the monkeys, you ought to back up those claims. When you perpetuate the myth that a woman is dirty unless her clitoris is severed from her body because the purple monkeys tell you so, you ought to back up that claim. When you slaughter people in cafes because you believe the purple monkeys gave you the land that they're on, you ought to back up that claim. When you won't allow your daughter to marry someone because they believe in pink monkeys instead of purple monkeys, you ought to back up that claim.

So yeah... people can believe what they want, but when it goes from personal reflection to social action, you damn well better back up that claim that those purple monkeys exist.