Argument against atheism

[Norfolk And Chance]

LOL, I'm not even going there...

You just stick to telling people that they cannot prove that they exist, so we can all laugh at you.

It is true though; you cannot prove that you exist. Nothing funny about it; the "you" that you understand yourself to be could only be an illusion and there is no way to prove that reality is real either. A couple of basic beliefs that we hold are that reality is real and there are other minds that exist besides your own.

I can prove I exist to you. Easily.

End of.

[JollyForr]

Oh, right, "You can't explain X, therefore God exists."

Um, yes Mr. O'Rly, we can explain the tides. 5 seconds on google would tell you all you need to know.

You overestimate the man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--es4FGwKQg

[thesummerqueen]

Irreligiosophy did an interview of Silverman - it's worth listening to if you want to hear an explanation of that little bit of ridiculousness.

[The Grand Nudger]

@The whole "you can't prove that you exist".

I see no reason to do so. I can accept that everything I perceive may be an illusion (we do have evidence that suggests that a great deal of what any human being perceives is exactly that). I exist at least within this illusion, and the god this guy is arguing for does not, again, at least within this illusion. So, what are we talking about here? An illusion within an illusion? Lies stacked upon lies...lol. Appealing to solipsism as a defense of ones inability to successfully make the case for their god just puts the arguer in an even worse position. As a defense of presuppositionalism (which I've seen it offered) it also fails. I do not need to presuppose my own factual existence to make observations about this illusory world. I'm an illusion making observations about the illusion, next? Perhaps our observations are illusions? No problem, I am an illusion, part of a larger collective illusion called us, that make illusory observations about our common illusion, which itself may be an illusion of an illusion...down the rabbit hole we go.....with each step it just gets worse and worse for those arguing for the illusion of god. At no point does an appeal to solipsism make anything more "real", quite the reverse.

[Epimethean]

Yes, this sort of mental masturbation should be handed a condom so that it doesn't make a mess or spread itself.

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's not forget that our inability to "prove" anything with any given system of thought has more to say about our systems of thought than it has to say about the cosmos. Just how ridiculous is it to make the implicit claim that the human mind is such a great tool that it can unravel the mysteries of the cosmos with complete certainty, once and for all time....or that the cosmos were so simple that we, with our short existence here, can make completely definative statements based on nothing but our own thoughts and thought process? A little less projection of our own shortcomings onto the fabric of reality would go a long damn way.

[factotum]

I noticed the word "bad" used here. Almost all value words have no meaning beyond "I like it" or "I do not like it" I discuss this and similar topics in an article http://www.xfoolnature.org/id5.html You may wish to investigate two areas, one is e-prime which promotes the abandoment of any use of the verb "to be". I partially agree with this but believe that one can use the verb to be, such as the word IS when referring to measurable sensible things, such as "he is six feet tall", or mary is taller than john.

One might also wish to explore a concept in physics that postulates that the underlying cause of everything is caused by information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_information I first came across this concept about 30 years ago in a book on general relativity theory, but it is now beginning to gain currency in the sense of moving from speculation to puting together theory and looking for evidence. In the bible this theory is put forth as "in the beginning was the word..."

Personally I am an agnostic since origins, ultimate things etc are beyond my ken. I am amazed that people can claim that all that exists is what we see since physics has pretty well established that what we see is not all that there is. Also, whatever constitutes personhood is not something physical, but is information residing, at least in this life, on something physical. Destroy the hard drive and Shakespear does not cease to exist. I recently came across an article that indicated that indicated that atheists have the same though processes as believers, they just come to different conclusions. I could not find the article

[Epimethean]

When you find it, the article will exist. In the mean time, there should be an understanding that there is a difference between bad=I do not like this and bad=this is harmful to my well-being, but if you wish to suggest that we can only like or not like something as a value judgment, that is your choice. Personally, I am agnostic toward that perspective.

[Reforged]

You can't explain the plot of Lost, therefore aliens did it.
Prove me wrong.