Its good to see that I am not the only one jumping to conclusion allowing a posteriori knowledge to irrationally say there is no God or gods.

There can be no posteriori proof of the non-existence of many gods, like the ones who conveniently leave no traces of their interaction, don't answer prayers when anyone's studying it, give many different and contradictory "spiritual" experiences to billions of people since the dawn of many, are defined outside of the universe etc. It's only empirically substantial concepts that can be falsified, and not this intellectually spineless ad-hoc theism you lot seem to cling to.

The only way the vast majority of gods can be disproved is priori, and that is because they are either self-refuting or incoherent. The omni god, when the omni set is used as defined and not just as "has all logically consistent power, knowledge and presence" etc, cannot possibly exist because when some of the omni attributes are combined as actually defined they are simply self-refuting concepts, riddled in paradox.

Being naive and quite possibly intellectually dishonest (how would I ever know?) I am having some difficulty understanding how the concepts of a priori and a posteriori proofs relate to my prioritisation of a position that god doesn't exist that I mentioned in Post #9 on the last page. It would be useful if the relationship could be spelt out, as I don't see it.

It has also been said that belief and knowledge are important because, "Those who claim knowledge of religious requirements are more likely to behave in ways consistent with that belief, as opposed to those tho are agnostic in belief, you would not for instance see an agnostic theist killing doctors at abortion clinics, or flying planes into buildings as neither have the same epistemic foundations for their beliefs."

But maybe people who fly planes into buildings would do that anyway, and a distorted belief in god is just one manifestation of their mental state. In my time I have known a lot of people who have believed in god and unless they have been leading a particularly disguised existence none of them to the best of my knowledge have ever killed a doctor. This seems to indicate to me that belief isn't correlated with murderous behaviour.

So is a God that "has all logically consistent power, knowledge and presence" something we should drum up a conversation about

(November 1, 2010 at 11:42 am)Paul the Human Wrote: I am willing to take it a step further, however, and state that I believe that no god(s) exist. I know that some of you find that to be an irrational claim, but I disagree. I do not claim to have objective knowledge that no god(s) exist ... Belief does not require objective knowledge.

I am one of those who find that to be an irrational claim. Allow me to explain why (for it has nothing to do with knowledge, objective or otherwise).

When you say, "I believe that no deity exists," you are indicating an implicit conclusion to which you have given intellectual assent (belief). However, a conclusion is something arrived at, that is, through a process of reasoning from premises. And what critical scrutiny will demonstrate is that you have given your intellectual assent on the basis of invalid reasoning. As any number of fallacies could have been committed in that process, I cannot specify which one you have committed. But if you spell out the premises which leads to the conclusion "no deity exists," you may realize the logical error without any comment from me. Are you willing to dare a critical evaluation of your belief?

1. "_____________________________________."

2. "_____________________________________."

3. "Therefore, no deity exists."

I believe nothing exists which merits the name god.

1: there is no evidence for a deity.
2: there is no compelling argument for the existance of a deity.
3: Therefore no deity exists.

(November 23, 2010 at 2:30 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: 1: there is no evidence for a deity.
2: there is no compelling argument for the existance of a deity.
3: Therefore no deity exists.

Three does not strictly follow from one and two, but it's close enough for a working assumption.

(November 23, 2010 at 12:27 am)Arcanus Wrote: 1. "_____________________________________."

2. "_____________________________________."

3. "Therefore, no deity exists."

Oooh, sounds like fun.

1. "Nature encompasses all that exists."

2. "[Some] deities are claimed to 'exist' outside of nature."

3. "Therefore, these supposed deities do not exist."
_____________________________________

1. "Nothing is not created."

2. "Something is created (and Something cannot be self-creating)."

3. "Therefore, the uncreated creator is Nothing."

Gah. The Ancient Greeks were right all along! It's Chaos!

1. If god exists he is an immaterial being
2. All beings are wholly material (as referenced by all of reality)
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists he would want all humanity to come to beleive in him and is capable of eliminating reasonable unbelief
2. Reasonable unbelief exists amongst humanity
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists then he is capble and willing to eliminate evil
2. Evil exists
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists then he is just and merciful and judges us all on our death
2. On judgement hell is a destination for some humans, but as a punishment in neither just nor merciful
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists then he is allowed us freewill and does not interfere with our decision making
2. God commands us to beleive in him, and only him, else we will suffer consequences (OT) and as a consequence tries to interfere with our decison making
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists then he is a purely immaterial being capable of changing events in the universe
2. The universe requires a material cause and effect mechanism to change events in the universe (as referenced by all of reality)
3. Therefore god does not exist

1. If god exists he is the creator of the universe and wouldn't choose to create the universe from disorder given the unpredictable results
2. The universe started from disorder
3. Therefore god does not exist

and on it goes