Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Exactly. Now apply this reasoning to God.
If there's no God...
- Thread starter ggazoo
- Start date
Exactly. Now apply this reasoning to God.
Bacteria exist IN OUR "REALM" (what we know)
Bacteria exist in our world
If a Creator exists, I doubt he would be within our "realm"
He would be beyond it
And therefore
He doesn't exist
In our realm
He exists beyond it
Nonetheless
He exists
(assuming he is real)
I already have; I cannot be certain of the existence of a god or not.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Ahem.. you're kind of contradicting yourself :bugeye:
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Don't be cheap.
"Yes you can, and so of course no evidence could ever be given against God existing. The probability of God will be very close to zero, but never actually zero unless you knew for certain God didn't exist, but you cannot do that and so you can believe the probability to be zero or you can accept you can never be certain."
Last edited:
Heh, knew you'd pick up on that, was going to edit it whilst you were replying but I thought I'd leave it. Insert "may be very close to zero" in my original post. In fact, come to think of it. If you know nothing about something(ie you have just imagined it) then I guess you can't really put a probability on its existence. I've actually always thought myself to be Agnostic leaning towards Atheism but that would be me putting a probability on the whole situation which I'm not sure you can do. I guess that leaves me completey Agnostic. Either way, if the existence of god were incredibly unlikely then can you really say it has probability zero? I'm really unlikely to win the lotto but that's not to say I won't.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Using current knowledge of the universe and Earth-nature there isn't a hint of God's existence.. I would say this common knowledge lets us put a probability on it.
If we know that nothing even remotely works a certain way, why assume that there is one thing out there that does ?
The only reason that I don't say the probability is zero is because we just don't know everything, but everything sure seems to point to a zero probability..
Last edited:
I'm still thinking about this one, something about putting a probability on it doesn't seem to work. I agree, there isn't a hint any god or god's existence as far as I know. So yeah this would put a probability according to current knowledge very low, yeah that definitely makes sense. This probability would of course have the chance to increase should any evidence present itself.
I'm really trying not to assume anything at all, maybe I have though, not sure if you've picked up on something I haven't.
Yeah I'd agree with most of that. Still not sure about putting a probability on an existence though. You say "evidence seems to point to a zero probability" but does it not make more sense to say "lack of evidence means we cannot put a high probability on the existence." Maybe I'm being picky but I think there's a difference there. Did you say you were agnostic by the way? Probability above zero means you are not certain, right?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Well, I don't mean a probability like 0.8% or whatever, just that it's very low according to current understanding.
No, I meant theists.. not you
Well, I consider current understanding of nature in general 'evidence'.Yeah I'd agree with most of that. Still not sure about putting a probability on an existence though. You say "evidence seems to point to a zero probability" but does it not make more sense to say "lack of evidence means we cannot put a high probability on the existence." Maybe I'm being picky but I think there's a difference there. Did you say you were agnostic by the way? Probability above zero means you are not certain, right?
I don't think one can put a probability on God's existence, precisely because there is no evidence.
I do think one can put an estimate probability on God's non-existence though.
I guess I'm an atheist but leaning towards agnosticism. I believe that's called weak atheism but I can't be bothered lol
Exactly. The problem though is that many people today want "rational certainty". This is why many people today won't get married... they want this rational certainty. They aren't willing to take a risk. The same applies to a relationship with God.
Hmm didn't actually know about weak atheism but according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism agnostics also fit the definition.
Noresefire,
Theism is the silliest concept I have ever heard; for a mere mortal to claim that he knows the mysteries of the universe?
No theist on Earth KNOWS if there is a God; they simply believe so.
Agnostics make the most sense: that they simply do not know.
The irreligious, at least, do not adhere to belief rather than attempting to spread their faith as a fact (like theists)
For anybody to say "There is a God" or "There is no God and that's a fact", they are an idiot.
I think what you really mean is that if someone makes an extraordinary claim than they ought to show extraordinary support for it. That seems to be relevant for those who assert “there is a god” equally for those who assert “there is no god”.
So what was your point?
Theism is the silliest concept I have ever heard; for a mere mortal to claim that he knows the mysteries of the universe?
No theist on Earth KNOWS if there is a God; they simply believe so.
Agnostics make the most sense: that they simply do not know.
The irreligious, at least, do not adhere to belief rather than attempting to spread their faith as a fact (like theists)
For anybody to say "There is a God" or "There is no God and that's a fact", they are an idiot.
I think what you really mean is that if someone makes an extraordinary claim than they ought to show extraordinary support for it. That seems to be relevant for those who assert “there is a god” equally for those who assert “there is no god”.
So what was your point?
Ggazoo,
For the non-religious that fact offers a superb opportunity for entertainment but it says nothing for the support or non-support of religious entities.
Two thirds of the planet population state they believe in some form of religious entity. That volume of belief presents itself as a huge potential for debate.
For the non-religious that fact offers a superb opportunity for entertainment but it says nothing for the support or non-support of religious entities.
Oh, we've got a right one here. What is a mere mortal ? An atheist would not use such language.
" No atheist on Earth..." do you believe there are atheists who are not on earth ? Maybe in heaven ?
Why is somebody who does not share your point of view an idiot ? Tell us why you are better informed; don't keep your wisdom to yourself !
The religious spend a lot of time spreading their propaganda and interfering in politics. Do you live on Mars ?
Because some of us have a hatred for bullshit.
I don't just spend my time on the bullshit of religion - It is also spent on Moon hoax bullshit, 9/11 conspiracy bullshit and general supernatural bullshit.
The more detail you give, the more ridiculous the concept becomes and less likely; however, as a core, the concept of a Creator is in no way ridiculous, and you can no more prove it's likeliness than it's existence.
In reality, neither atheists or theists have any proof, nor can they ever know until they are dead.
Therefore, we are back to belief (or lack of it); however, that being said, I believe it is better for society to have a moderate form of faith, than pure atheism.
In reality, neither atheists or theists have any proof, nor can they ever know until they are dead.
Therefore, we are back to belief (or lack of it); however, that being said, I believe it is better for society to have a moderate form of faith, than pure atheism.
Just because there is no proof either way is does not make it a 50/50 thing. Those making claims without a shred of supporting evidence stand a near 100% likelihood of being false.
You don't know anything when you are dead.
Well you are entitled to your opinion as we are entitled to ours, and I dont know that I would ever make the claim that society should be devoid of religion. If you want to take a theistic approach what you believe by al means do so, but I myself look at the facts and lean towards the opposite end of the spectrum. Thats just me. :shrug:
The trouble with society is that there are too many people squabbling about faith, each wanting to outdo the other. Why not visit Pastor Phelps for a start, then head for Kansas.