RE: Atheism and the existence of peanut butter
September 16, 2021 at 12:42 pm
(This post was last modified: September 16, 2021 at 4:35 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(September 14, 2021 at 11:46 am)Klorophyll Wrote:(September 13, 2021 at 6:01 pm)Angrboda Wrote: False. We can't even say that our own universe required a beginning or else is past eternal, much less a universe we know nothing about.
For any existing universe, the two propositions, P :"A universe began to exist" and Q :"A universe has an eternal past" are mutually exclusive, one of them must be true, Q is simply non-P. This is the basic law of excluded middle.
Unless you're willing to deny the most basic rules of logic and delve into sophistry, you are forced to pick one of these propositions.
(September 13, 2021 at 6:01 pm)Angrboda Wrote: You are simply wrong in your claim that any universe that did not begin to exist must be past eternal. How would you even know such a thing?
Splash your face with water and re-read what's above.... I guess ?
(September 13, 2021 at 6:01 pm)Angrboda Wrote: [emphasis mine]
As pointed out, the rule is not valid in this context and it doesn't justify thinking it unlikely that a malevolent deity would create the maternal instinct.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth in more ways than one. If the existence of evil is compatible with a benevolent deity, then the existence of good is compatible with an evil deity. You can't carve out a greater likelihood for one or the other, as both depend upon the same argument.
You say, "You can't carve out a greater likelihood for one or the other", as if I didn't give plenty of reasons already for why the balance tilts towards benevolence.. This is not rocket science, we evaluate this "likelihood" based on what we observe. And what we observe is that peace, empathy, sense of community, our inner moral compass, our sense of justice, etc. are all the default state of our species. Going to war is an exceptional occurence, perpetrating genocide and other gravely immoral acts is exceptional, etc.
My argument for compatbility serves only to prove that theism is coherent, regardless of its truth value. Proving that benevolence is the actual state of affairs -if God exists- can only be done by inference, i.e. by infering God's character based on his creatures'.
(September 13, 2021 at 10:33 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: In order to sidestep the obvious problem of not having any evidence
As I explained repeatedly, countless observations about the world -that atheists recognize too- can, and are, used as premises in arguments in favor of God's existence.
Wrong. As been demonstrated in this very thread. Amazing that you think you’ve solved mysteries of reality that the greatest scientific minds in the world are still studying and debating. And even if we grant you those assumptions, that still only gets you to “a cause.” Not a god. You’ve yet to demonstrate that the cause of the universe must necessarily be supernatural. You can’t even explain what a supernatural thing is without invoking an argument from ignorance fallacy as @Angrboda mentioned a few pages back. You have failed on all fronts. But by all means, carry on with your show.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.