Atheists/Agnostics: Why don't you believe?

[atheroy]

this isnt exactly about religion's,its about god,

yeah, sorry. god and religion are just synonomous to me. i think perhaps i would change how i posted seeing i decided to mis-read this post so badly.

 

[Gravage]

My answers...

3)God is just a means of social control
4)God is just a figment of our imagination
8)It is absurd to believe in God

 

[Gravage]

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
I chose

• There is no proof that God exists.

I prefer

• I know of no evidence warranting the belief in God.

The concept of "proof" is, in my opinion, more appropriate to math, logic, and liquor.

I completely agree with that.

 

[Gravage]

Yep...

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
I chose

• There is no proof that God exists.

I prefer

• I know of no evidence warranting the belief in God.

The concept of "proof" is, in my opinion, more appropriate to math, logic, and liquor.

I completely agree with that.

 

[James R]

From the responses so far, we have 35 atheists/agnostics in the religion forum, and only 10 theists.

Surprising, don't you think?

 

[everneo]

Only 35 Atheists/Agnostics in this forum..?!!

 

[doom]

Originally posted by everneo
Only 35 Atheists/Agnostics in this forum..?!!

No but i think some are probably getting tired of the bullshit,im agnostic although i find it impossible to be an atheist or a believer due to the never ending shitty arguments both side.

Heres my true belief:
the arguments will never end

Im fairly certain that no matter where science leads us,or where the evolution of the human race is going while people believe in god there will be people that dont and both will argue.

You almost certainly wont win many arguments cos its always gonna lead back to:

prove it!
i cant,you prove it
i cant,you prove he does
you prove he dont
blah blah blah
a few arguments on this theory that theory
there just theorys,prove it
prove me wrong
i cant
etc etc drives me up the fucking wall.

 

[DJSupreme23]

If there are humans, there will be arguing.

From a logical POV, I'm agnostic too, but I tend to bend to the side og atheism - I have never sensed or experienced anything that can make me believe in the existence of a higher being. And certinly not one that interferes in worldly affairs.

If i were to be religious, I would certainly be Deist.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by DJSupreme23
If there are humans, there will be arguing.

No there won't.

 

[James R]

doom,

This is a simple poll asking what people believe. It's not trying to tell people what to believe or why. Where's the harm?

 

[Pete]

Minor quibble...

I don't feel the need to believe in God. I think that others do, and God bless 'em!

I don't know if God is unknowable or not. I think that if God exists, it may or may not be knowable. If God doesn't exist, it is certainly unknowable.

 

[grover]

God isn't a physical being, how then could there be proof of it? I can't think of a single instance when the word proof isn't synonomous with physical evidence.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by grover
I can't think of a single instance when the word proof isn't synonomous with physical evidence.

Even after high school geometry? Actually, I'm not sure that I can think of a case where proof is synonymous with physical evidence.

 

[Pete]

God isn't a physical being, how then could there be proof of it? I can't think of a single instance when the word proof isn't synonomous with physical evidence.

Bloody inductionist!

Believers in God usually believe that God can produce physical effects. The impossiblity is in distinguishing random events from the effects of a God who doesn't want to be provable.

 

[doom]

Originally posted by James R
doom,

This is a simple poll asking what people believe. It's not trying to tell people what to believe or why. Where's the harm?

Its the very nature of these questions,look around for christsakes,the arguments are back and forth back and forth,its like watching a fucking game of tennis with both sides being john mcenroe.

"you cannot be serious"

 

[grover]

Even after high school geometry? Fine, then prove to me that a point, or line exists.

 

[Pete]

That's a pretty bad example, grover, considering that no true points or lines physically exist (they're the conceptual limiting case).

 

[grover]

Pete, my whole point is that there can be no proof of god because it is not a physical thing. Based upon your previous post you seem to agree with me that there can be no proof of things that don't physically exist.

 

[Pete]

Yes.
Sorry, I read you from the wrong side.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by grover
Pete, my whole point is that there can be no proof of god because it is not a physical thing.

On the contrary, the proper domain for 'proof' is the a priori.