Argument against atheism

[Rhizomorph13]

I think plastic is the primary function of the universe and we are but cog in the machine that is the Earth to produce plastic. Yep, viscoelastic polymers with a modulus around 15 gigapascals with a glass transition of 140 degrees c... because, because, we're good at it! Not to exceed 3 standard deviations from the mean. Daktaklakpak 6655326.

amkerman, it seems your God shares a lot of your ideas. Could it be that you are crafting him for your own ends? Its all good, I've done that too when I was an agnostic theist.

[thesummerqueen]

Carlin's wisdom strikes again.

[Jackalope]

All I claimed was that it was illogical for atheists to believe in objective morality but not believe in something that would be called God.

Who said that atheists do believe in objective morality? I certainly don't, and based on conversations we've had here on that very topic, not many here do.

I could go so far as to argue that in order for any standard of morality to be objective at all, it would have to be so independent of any deity or mortal being. That is, unless you want to go redefine objectivity to as special pleading for a deity.

Even ignoring all of that, you're still left with the problem that "something that would be called god" is so ill-defined as to be useless as a point of discussion. Solidify that definition so everyone's all on the same page, and then maybe there will be something to be discuss. Otherwise, it's far to easy for the goalposts to get moved.

---

P.S. - If you're going to bring an argument that you know is going to generate a lot of disagreement, in a forum where such arguments are heard and refuted on a daily basis.... You had better do your fucking homework and bring your 'A' game. Which, judging by the responses you're getting - you haven't done by any reasonable standard.

[Minimalist]

Oh, Min! You never fail me!!

This is not my day to tolerate fools gladly, Sweetie.

[amkerman]

faith no more: Yes, I have called atheism illogical, because the argument I make leads me to believe atheism is illogical. That is why the thread is called an argument against atheism. But I haven't made any value judgements about whether atheism is good or bad, right or wrong, etc. i posted the argument because i thought someone would at least attempt to defend their beliefs using reason and thought, but mostly what i am seeing are ad hominem attacks on me and baseless rejection of my argument because it is against atheism.

I think I made an argument why morality as an objective truth makes more sense than morality as a purely subjective construct in my op. No one has defended the position that it would logically make more sense that morality is subjective in nature. because I admitted the fact that it was entirely possible that atheism is correct, and since most of the posters on here are atheists it seems already, they probably agreed with me on that point, and so didn't blast me for it.

Of course my argument is offensive to atheists, it challenges the validity of atheistic beliefs. Are we not to question beliefs and assumptions about how the universe works now? should I just say and do the things which make the most people happy and forgo a quest for knowledge or enlightenment? If anyone just wants to live in blissful ignorance and be stupid, whether they believe in God or not, they are in the end lying to themselves. I take offense at being called a troll. I did not intend to maximize disagreement and my argument is a belief that I hold. But my belief has nothing to do with the argument. The argument must stand or fail on it's own, regardless of my belief.

---

cthulhu: no one said atheists believe in an objective morality, at least I certainly have not said it.

The fact is I can not do better at defining what God is because science has never considered or acknowledged the possibility of God. It would be like defining exactly how dark matter was created before science even thought dark matter existed.

Your argument about morality is exactly the argument I am making. morality would have to be a law of the universe. it would be real. morality denotes value judgements as being inherently true, value judgments necessitate consciousness as a primary function of the universe... which would most correctly be described as a monotheistic deity, or "God".

[Erinome]

Cite one example of an ad hominem attack upon you.

Of course my argument is offensive to atheists, it challenges the validity of atheistic beliefs.

Atheism has no beliefs. If you're referring to our disbelief, I welcome anyone to challenge that. I want to know the truth more than I want to be right.

The truth is that you want to be right. This is how all of you people act when there is nothing left to do but interject the same argument, for which the only evidence is speculation. You accuse those opposed of being unfair, or attacking you. Okay, we're attacking you, but not in the way you expected, and not in the way in which you're painting things. Unless you have something new to add, and until you can stop acting like a whining bitch about people arguing back on an argument you started, just shut the fuck up.

[amkerman]

i think some may be confused by the term "consciousness as a primary function of the universe". I am not saying that the purpose of the universe is consciousness. The term merely means that consciousness is a property that is inherent in the universe, like the laws of physics, rather than a emergent property of complex systems, like the brain.

[Faith No More]

I have read no such argument from you, just merely an attempt to redefine 'god' as something more palatable than the bearded man in the sky. And if objective morality becomes the standard for god's existence, consider him debunked, because you have not proven there is any such thing.

What is your evidence that morality is anything but a human construct, and can you demonstrate what the standard for morality would be?

[thesummerqueen]

Atheism isn't logical or illogical.

It has nothing to do with logic. Simply a lack of beliefs.

If you want to argue the logic of how someone arrived at atheism, by all means, I got a full glass and nothing else to do.

---

That's not true - wading through Milton's Paradise Lost is a hell of a lot more entertaining.

[Jackalope]

i think some may be confused by the term "consciousness as a primary function of the universe". I am not saying that the purpose of the universe is consciousness. The term merely means that consciousness is a property that is inherent in the universe, like the laws of physics, rather than a emergent property of complex systems, like the brain.

Great. Now provide empirical evidence to support that assertion.