RE: Strong Atheism and what it REALLY means to be an atheist
January 10, 2011 at 9:47 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2011 at 9:47 am by Relayer.)
minotza Wrote:The fact that we cannot conclusively prove or disprove god's existence means that there is a probability for his existing, right? I'm not talking about the God in the traditional sense, you can replace "God" with "supernatural being" or whatever pleases you.It really depends which god you are talking about. There are some gods that we know conclusively don't exist - for example, gods that only allow worlds without suffering in them to exist. With the Christian God, it is either necessary that He exists or impossible. To say that it is possible, probable or even improbable that He exists leads to the conclusion that He does exist. (This is a conclusion of the modal ontological argument.) So it is not a case of probability with the Christian God.
Quote:To prove you have experienced god you would have to prove god exists first which has yet to be done.To prove that you have experienced a tree, do you need to prove that a tree exists first?
Quote:No human being has any awareness of any GOOD arguments in favor of God's existence, otherwise we wouldn't be atheists, right?"We" are not all atheists.
Quote:I never said if something hasn't been observed it probably doesn't exist, I said that if something hasn't been observed then it is only rational based on our knowledge to not believe that it exists.I never said you did say it - I said you assumed it. In particular, when you said that "the probability of a black swan was extremely low because we have never seen one or heard of one".
Quote:I have no idea what you mean by your last point =[What I mean is this:
You acknowledge in your use of argumentation that things like the laws of logic exist and universally apply. In order for an atheistic worldview to be consistent, it needs to be able to provide some plausible explanation of this. One of the major arguments for the Christian God put forward is the Transcendental Argument for God (TAG), which argues (to put it very simply, and to give only one aspect of the argument) that if the laws of logic exist, then the Christian God exists (equivalently, if the Christian God does not exist, then the laws of logic do not exist). So TAG challenges your assumption that the laws of logic exist.
