(June 22, 2021 at 2:28 pm)Frank Apisa Wrote:

(June 22, 2021 at 2:14 pm)brewer Wrote: I did, maybe you need to read again, no concrete evidence = no god.

And do us all a favor, change your font size.

Not sure how the font size happened, but it must have been because I wrote it in Word and cut & paste it here. Sorry it upset you.

I do not have to read your post again. You did not answer any of my questions.

Do you assert there are no gods...or are you asserting you have seen no evidence of any gods.

Those are two different things.

I'm not upset that you're ignorant (not sure how that happened). I think it upset you when I pointed it out.

Not two different things, one thing, no concrete evidence = no god. I believe you have a reading comprehension issue.

(June 22, 2021 at 12:14 pm)Frank Apisa Wrote: I joined this forum to ask some questions of people who use “atheist” as a descriptor (or part of a descriptor)…so, if I may, here goes.

First, a predicate:
My personal take on the question, “Are there any gods?” (which seems to be a subset of, “What is the true nature of the REALITY of existence?”) is:

I do not know if any "gods"** exist or not;

I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;

I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;

I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

**When I use the word "god" I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF THERE IS SUCH AN ENTITY."

A few preliminary questions:

Is there anyone here who asserts, “No gods exist?”

Is there anyone here who asserts that he/she KNOWS that no gods exist?

Is there anyone here who asserts that it is impossible for gods to exist?

God damn Word copy-pasta with formatting!!




As someone who uses the moniker atheist to describe himself, I do not believe that such a god as you describe exists.
This is not synonymous with "I believe that a god such as you describe does not exist", although someone like this could also use the atheist moniker.



I too see no reason to suspect that a god is impossible to exist (using exist here as a placeholder for existence in a form other than the imaginary, and the physical, given that I assume we are excluding those two from the equation since god is described as the creator of the physical and we don't want to keep this entity in the realm of human imagination).

And I have no reason to suspect that such an entity is necessary. Quantum foam and other weird stuff should be enough to account for the known Universe.

I do, however, see enough evidence to posit a guess in one way. That way tells me that god is a man made construct and, like I said, quantum foam could provide a natural way for the Universe to arise from the emptiness of vacuum. As such, god probably does not exist out of human (or other intelligent and imaginative) minds.

Quote:Boru: You assert that no gods exist…and that you KNOW that none exist…but that you are not asserting that it is impossible for gods to exist.
 
I question that you actually KNOW that no gods exist, but I would love for you to tell me more about how you KNOW. It sounds to me that you “know” the way some theist explain how they “know” their god exists. Can you flesh you “know” out a bit?

Be happy to. 

I’m using ‘know’ in the more pedestrian sense, in that I can’t reasonably doubt that gods don’t exist - the evidence is not there and the arguments are unconvincing. I find this very, very different from theists ‘knowing’ that gods exist, so they do so in spite of unconvincing arguments and paucity of evidence. Let’s try a non-theistic example of what I mean:

I know that the Earth isn’t flat. Not only is there no evidence to support the idea, but the arguments fabricated by Flat Earthers are so unconvincing as to be laughable. Be the Flatties, despite massive evidence and irrefutable arguments to the contrary, still insist that the rest of us have got it wrong.

Do I have an epistemological certitude that gods don’t exist? No. But I can’t doubt that they don’t.

Boru

This guy:
gods exist. In the land of fairy tales and daydreams.

Newb bewb:
No one…you sound as though you are saying that no gods exist, but you did not explicitly say so. Any chance you want to expand on your comments?

gods                    exist.                     In                     the                     land                     of                     fairy                     tales                     and                                       daydreams.


Is that better?

Hi Frank, welcome to the forum. Thanks for turning off the font. Word is probably not your friend in that respect. If you need to use it then you can go into the BBCode and strip the formatting as I have done below.

(June 22, 2021 at 12:14 pm)Frank Apisa Wrote: My personal take on the question, “Are there any gods?” (which seems to be a subset of, “What is the true nature of the REALITY of existence?”) is:

I do not know if any "gods"** exist or not;

I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;

I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;

I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

Fair enough, and what you know determines whether you are gnostic or agnostic, a fairly useless label IMO. Every time you use it you have to qualify it with the concept that you are being gnostic/agnostic about. But what do you believe?

Quote:Is there anyone here who asserts, “No gods exist?”

Is there anyone here who asserts that he/she KNOWS that no gods exist?

Is there anyone here who asserts that it is impossible for gods to exist?

I'll let you decide. My stance is that all deities are either:
- Incoherent. The Abrahamic god that's a confusion of mythologies and painfully laden with tribalism and bigotry.
- Inconsistent. A god that is self-refuting by virtue of having characteristics that are contradictory.
- Ineffable. A god that could conceivably exist but cannot be apprehended by mortal minds.
- Irrelevant. A god that is indistinguishable from natural phenomena in every way, shape and form.
- Insufficient. A god that we can't discuss properly because it lacks definition.

On a good day you can manage to hit all five of those in one go.

Quote:**When I use the word "god" I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF THERE IS SUCH AN ENTITY."

It's a good start but this falls to insufficiency. This is a statement of a single act, not a proper definition. I'm not trying to be picky here, but what you have outlined could describe any of a number of very different deities. One theist might believe in a deity who wound up the universe and let it go and then buggered off into the void never to be heard from ever again. Their neighbour might believe in a deity that created the universe but is an active, personal god that demands the sacrifice of our firstborn child. Without further information how can we debate the merits of chucking little Timmy into the volcano? Yes, that's a deliberately silly example to highlight the fact that you need to flesh out your definition. Start with power, knowledge, and intent. Those are the big ones that commonly trip deities up.

(June 22, 2021 at 2:40 pm)brewer Wrote: I'm not upset that you're ignorant (not sure  how that happened). I think it upset you when I pointed it out.

Not two different things, one thing, no concrete evidence = no god. I believe you have a reading comprehension issue.

I

I was not upset when you pointed it out...although I realized it had happened without your assistance. I thank you for it anyway.

Two completely different things. Sorry you do not see that. There is absolutely no concrete evidence that there is no sentient life on any planet circling the nearest 15 stars to Sol...but that does not = no sentient beings on any of those planets. That is not a reading comprehension problem...it is a logic problem.

Don't lose your cool yet. We've got a long way to go..

I don’t assert any of your three bullet points.

(June 22, 2021 at 3:10 pm)pocaracas Wrote: God damn Word copy-pasta with formatting!!  




As someone who uses the moniker atheist to describe himself, I do not believe that such a god as you describe exists.
This is not synonymous with "I believe that a god such as you describe does not exist", although someone like this could also use the atheist moniker.



I too see no reason to suspect that a god is impossible to exist (using exist here as a placeholder for existence in a form other than the imaginary, and the physical, given that I assume we are excluding those two from the equation since god is described as the creator of the physical and we don't want to keep this entity in the realm of human imagination).

And I have no reason to suspect that such an entity is necessary. Quantum foam and other weird stuff should be enough to account for the known Universe.

I do, however, see enough evidence to posit a guess in one way. That way tells me that god is a man made construct and, like I said, quantum foam could provide a natural way for the Universe to arise from the emptiness of vacuum. As such, god probably does not exist out of human (or other intelligent and imaginative) minds.


You wrote: As someone who uses the moniker atheist to describe himself, I do not believe that such a god as you describe exists.
This is not synonymous with "I believe that a god such as you describe does not exist", although someone like this could also use the atheist moniker.
 
RESPONSE: We are in agreement that  saying, "I do not believe that such a god as (I) describe exists" is substantially different from "I believe such a god does not exist." I will talk about that difference many times if this discussion goes forward. (I'm not yet convinced it will.)




You wrote: And I have no reason to suspect that such an entity is necessary. Quantum foam and other weird stuff should be enough to account for the known Universe.
 
RESPONSE: I agree. There is absolutely no reason to suspect such an entity is necessary. But it is still possible such an entity exists.
 
You wrote: I too see no reason to suspect that a god is impossible to exist (using exist here as a placeholder for existence in a form other than the imaginary, and the physical, given that I assume we are excluding those two from the equation since god is described as the creator of the physical and we don't want to keep this entity in the realm of human imagination).
 
RESPONSE: Not entirely sure of your point here. Gods are possible. We can leave it at that.



You wrote:  I do, however, see enough evidence to posit a guess in one way. That way tells me that god is a man made construct and, like I said, quantum foam could provide a natural way for the Universe to arise from the emptiness of vacuum. As such, god probably does not exist out of human (or other intelligent and imaginative) minds.
 
RESPONSE:  I see no unambiguous evidence whatever in either direction on the question. Theists seem to see lots of evidence that at least one god exists; atheists seem to see lots of evidence that none exist. Confirmation bias, as I see it.
 
I do agree that the Abrahamic god, like the many gods that pre-date it, seem to be made-made constructs. BUT…gods may exist.

(June 22, 2021 at 4:57 pm)Frank Apisa Wrote:

(June 22, 2021 at 2:40 pm)brewer Wrote: I'm not upset that you're ignorant (not sure  how that happened). I think it upset you when I pointed it out.

Not two different things, one thing, no concrete evidence = no god. I believe you have a reading comprehension issue.

I

I was not upset when you pointed it out...although I realized it had happened without your assistance. I thank you for it anyway.

Two completely different things. Sorry you do not see that. There is absolutely no concrete evidence that there is no sentient life on any planet circling the nearest 15 stars to Sol...but that does not = no sentient beings on any of those planets. That is not a reading comprehension problem...it is a logic problem.

Don't lose your cool yet. We've got a long way to go..

I don't have to supply evidence of no sentient life or god, I'm not making the claim.

Argumentum ex Silentio: http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/EN...lacies.htm

Pink Unicorns with gills and 3 dicks may exist as well, but they don't.