The argument against God

[LukeMC]

Well that was odd...

[CoxRox]

Technically, he doesn't have to give an argument. He's at the default position of "Bullshit, till you prove it with real evidence." Mosts theists don't seem to understand they have the burden of proof

You are quite right about the burden of proof being with the believers but to speak up on behalf of believers if I may; when I first joined this forum, I too was very interested to discover why atheists don't believe in a god or in the supernatural. I figured you guys would humour me at least and explain your positions, which I'm very pleased to say many of you have done. You have helped me to understand this onus being on the believers and most importantly the main reasons why you don't believe in a god or the supernatural. When I first joined here, I used to look at the world around me: the 'creation' as I saw it (and still do I suppose) and wondered why you guys didn't 'see' this proof. I wasn't thinking of burden of proof etc. I was 'seeing' God around me and wondered why you didn't see the same thing. Many of you have spent much time debating with me about why you don't see God or indeed believe in such a thing and I thank you for your time.

[Tiberius]

Technically, he doesn't have to give an argument. He's at the default position of "Bullshit, till you prove it with real evidence." Mosts theists don't seem to understand they have the burden of proof

You are quite right about the burden of proof being with the believers but to speak up on behalf of believers if I may; when I first joined this forum, I too was very interested to discover why atheists don't believe in a god or in the supernatural. I figured you guys would humour me at least and explain your positions, which I'm very pleased to say many of you have done. You have helped me to understand this onus being on the believers and most importantly the main reasons why you don't believe in a god or the supernatural. When I first joined here, I used to look at the world around me: the 'creation' as I saw it (and still do I suppose) and wondered why you guys didn't 'see' this proof. I wasn't thinking of burden of proof etc. I was 'seeing' God around me and wondered why you didn't see the same thing. Many of you have spent much time debating with me about why you don't see God or indeed believe in such a thing and I thank you for your time.

How is the book on Evolution going? I got Prothero's book for Christmas, and it's absolutely fascinating. I'd recommend it to everyone.

[bozo]

Technically, he doesn't have to give an argument. He's at the default position of "Bullshit, till you prove it with real evidence." Mosts theists don't seem to understand they have the burden of proof

You are quite right about the burden of proof being with the believers but to speak up on behalf of believers if I may; when I first joined this forum, I too was very interested to discover why atheists don't believe in a god or in the supernatural. I figured you guys would humour me at least and explain your positions, which I'm very pleased to say many of you have done. You have helped me to understand this onus being on the believers and most importantly the main reasons why you don't believe in a god or the supernatural. When I first joined here, I used to look at the world around me: the 'creation' as I saw it (and still do I suppose) and wondered why you guys didn't 'see' this proof. I wasn't thinking of burden of proof etc. I was 'seeing' God around me and wondered why you didn't see the same thing. Many of you have spent much time debating with me about why you don't see God or indeed believe in such a thing and I thank you for your time.

I'll take this as a bit of a go against me. I am not a patient person, I think I have told you CR this previously. I will not indulge you in your long exchanges over creation/evolution etc.
You WANT to believe in God. That's up to you.
I see no point in treating Dagda any differently to you.
I say that the probability is that God doesn't exist. You and Dagda must give me evidence to alter that probability if I am to take you both seriously.

[True Unbeliever]

I was 'seeing' God around me and wondered why you didn't see the same thing.

This is a wonderful demonstration of perception in the terms of : (recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based chiefly on memory. Dictionary .com) I can empathise with what CoxRox is saying. I look at the God Squad in practice and think 'this is rubbish and wondered why they couldn't see the same thing'.

Belief influences perception (calling Mrs Obvious, I know, but stick with me) and, despite the logic of science, belief is maintained for its purpose of providing comfort, moral code etc. So I guess when softcore theists ask why wouldn't I prefer to live with this 'happy ending' stuff(in the way a 'glass half full' perception is probably a better perception for my state of mind)I don't have a better answer than "I just don't need it"

So I assume the next question would be.."then why do you care if other people do?" i.e why actively promote atheism?

For many reasons. I support a completely secular society. I support 'right of choice' in the abortion and euthanasia debates. I continue to be appalled at what is done around the world 'in the name of God' and want to add my voice in condemnation of irrational thinking.
In addition to this I think 'science' needs a cheer squad. Ethically based research is what saves lives and is vital to the quality of our existance. To hobble research in the name of archiac religious notions is outrageous.(There are more reasons but long blogs can get tedious.)

So...Give me a 'S'...give me a 'C'...

[CoxRox]

I'll take this as a bit of a go against me. I am not a patient person, I think I have told you CR this previously. I will not indulge you in your long exchanges over creation/evolution etc.
You WANT to believe in God. That's up to you.
I see no point in treating Dagda any differently to you.
I say that the probability is that God doesn't exist. You and Dagda must give me evidence to alter that probability if I am to take you both seriously.

Bozo, I'm trying to explain how the thinking processes are 'different' when you believe in a god. I now understand very clearly how atheists view such subjects such as 'god' or the supernatural. Why do you get impatient with us? I have presented my 'proofs' of a God on here before and have had many interesting debates (not with you I don't think). We can't all be patient. I know that. I see threads going on that don't interest me so I keep out of them. Logically speaking you can tell someone their argument or request is itself flawed ie Dagda wanting non belivers to present proof that there is no God but surely it's good to point this out in a way that helps the person?

---

How is the book on Evolution going? I got Prothero's book for Christmas, and it's absolutely fascinating. I'd recommend it to everyone.

I've just started it. I'll let you know as I get into it. So far so good.

---

True Unbeliever, thanks for your feedback on this. Maybe it is my mind playing a trick on me and the 'beliefs' I have held since a child, that make me 'see' God in the things around me! This is what I am trying to ascertain. Having said that I'm in good company. Many great scientists have also seen this 'mirage' too.

[leo-rcc]

That argument fails on the level when I would say that "far more scientist do not see that mirage." Appeals to authority are just as useless as appeals to popularity. Science is interested in facts, not perception or majority rulings.

[DD_8630]

Many great scientists have also seen this 'mirage' too.

And many more see it as just an illusion. It's not for nothing that religious adherence is negatively correlated with education. The ability to explain the seemingly unexplainable is a powerful tool for deconversion, if only because more people use the fallacious reasoning in the first place.

But as leo-rcc said, appeals to authority are fallacious. Even geniuses get things wrong (Newton and alchemy, Einstein and quantum mechanics, Hawking and the famous bet, etc).

[CoxRox]

That argument fails on the level when I would say that "far more scientist do not see that mirage." Appeals to authority are just as useless as appeals to popularity. Science is interested in facts, not perception or majority rulings.

It was more a tongue-in-cheek comment of me saying: 'I'm not alone'. I know that these guys may be just as wrong as me. I couldn't resist mentioning them. We like to be associated with certain people. It's a human thing I suppose.

[Eilonnwy]

I agree with you 100%, Bozo, that the theist has the burden of proof. But sometimes it does help to put on that christian hat and work within their framework. I think it does help if you are attempting to reach out to people and help them understand, because most people are raised to believe in God as fact just as the sun is real. I know how it's hard to reverse that thinking and realize the sun actually shows it exists and god doesn't. I know because I did it myself. There's a big disconnect in thinking between theists and atheists a lot of times and I think it is worth it sometimes to go within their framework because that's the only way they can understand. Some atheists see the value in it, other's don't.