The Case for Atheism

[Drew_2013]

Ryantology,

Drew is frustrated because he has committed to a position he cannot demonstrate to be true, thus placing him on the defensive. His only means of achieving intellectual parity with the rest of us is by inciting us with solipsism he, himself, does not subscribe to, so as to lower us to his level.

I'd have to go into an induced coma to achieve intellectual parity with you...

Faith No More

We know that your theism has failed to meet the burden of proof.

Any time you can find a group of impartial people to judge the merit of our respective arguments I'll be happy to debate theism with you. You aren't so stupid to think the fact as an atheist you think I've failed to meet the burden of proof means anything do you?

We know that our inability to definitively know the origins of life doesn't mean that your answer is correct.

No, it doesn't mean my belief is correct. It does mean you don't know if my belief is incorrect or your counter belief is correct.

We know that you believe you know the answers, despite being able to demonstrate that.

I've expressed all my opinions as beliefs and backed up those beliefs with facts and data.

We know that you would rather arrogantly claim to know something without sufficient evidence to back up that knowledge than admit you don't know.

Care to cite an instance?

Shall I go on?

Knock yourself out.

Texas,

You've invoked "trancendent being". From where do you draw that such a thing exists other than the fact that it makes sense to YOU because there's not a factual explanation?

If you've seen my post The Case for Theism you already know.

If my leg it itched and I didn't know why, could I just make up a creature, assert it as something that makes legs itch, say its invisible and assume its in my pocket, doing its work? Would this be okay since there was no other explanation given as to why my leg itched at that moment?

You're analogy is humorous because in some cases itching can be caused by a small creature invisible to the naked eye. But I assume what you're trying to say is we shouldn't invoke explanations out of whole cloth. You seem to be unaware that's often how advances in knowledge is often made. You create a model (sometimes out of whole cloth) that tentatively explains a phenomena. Einstien proposed something that seemed crazy to account for why time it took Mercury to circle the sun was slightly off. He proposed that time diliated. It was crazy and unthinkable...and true. A certain scientist notices that the continents looked like they would all fit together as a puzzle and proposed the adsurd idea the continents were all together at one time. Absurd but true.

If there is ZERO results to compare for a God, you cannot preponder any sort of evidence as you have none to compare!

Huh?

You have an unfalsifiable hypothesis, and you chalk up the entire universe to an entity that you haven't been able to rationally establish.

It is falsifiable. If another cause for the existence of the universe is proven it will falsify the belief God caused it.

Lastly, no body can PROVE you don't have a unicorn in your pocket, so they can't claim it to be a fact that you don't.

They couldn't examine the contents of my pocket? You have been listening to your fellow atheists too much.

But pay attention here...We have no reason to believe you as such a claim doesn't correlate with reality, so its more likely, that the unicorn you claim is in your pocket, does not exist. So I do not believe it.

Fine, you do realize I never made such a claim true?

For the same reasons, I do not believe your God claims. They lack all discernible attributes consistent with anything I believe exists.

Texas Sailor...its not the same. Both theists and atheists agree that the universe exists, life exists and sentient life exists. Most people (including atheists) don't believe these things popped into existence uncaused out of nothing although some atheists promote that idea. Most believe something caused it to occur. Since most atheists don't believe a personal agent, Creator or God was involved they believe it was some mechanistic unguided unplanned result of mindless forces that didn't intend to create a universe, life or sentient life. Even though this is the unavoidable logical conclusion one would arrive at if they don't believe in a Creator... you won't find any atheists to make thier case or provide evidence that supports this conclusion. They just go into their weak atheist song and dance that atheism is just a lack of belief in God.

The latter...as those "mindless forces" are what makes trees move when it's windy, the tides roll in and out, and govern the continuity of everything I experience as I understand it. For you to convince me otherwise, you would have to have a really good reason for doing so. Telling me that it makes sense to you, doesn't qualify. Try again.

Let me shake your hand...at least your attempting to make a case for what you believe which is more than your fellow coward atheists are willing to do. No one disputes this physical material world exists and that with a rigid set of laws of nature, it causes many things such as planets, solar systems, stars and galaxies. That doesn't explain why there is something rather than nothing and why if something does exist such as a universe, why it has laws of nature that cause all the conditions for life and sentient life to exist.

You seem to confuse my thought experiment with a claim of knowledge. I haven't proven the unicorn doesn't exist anymore than anyone could disprove God. However, they are equally viable claims that lack substance and neither correlate with reality. Therefore, I comfortably reject them as they are both very improbable. They are only possible by virtue of them being unfalsifiable. Don't conflate probability with possibility.

You're mistaken about the notion God can't be disproven. We're the mythological gods such as the god of rain, fire and earthquakes disproven? Yes because a better competing explanation with more evidence was found for it. If the same occurs for the existence of the universe most people would eventually reject belief in God.