"Knockdown" Argument Against Naturalism

[Mudhammam]

[pocaracas]

[FreeTony]

I'm not sure anyone believes the supernatural does definitely not exist. The burden of proof is on the person claiming the supernatural does exist. Without a complete knowledge of the laws of the universe (or possibly omniscience), one cannot determine whether something has a natural or supernatural cause. If you can't do this you have no good reason to believe in it.

Let's take an example. A supernatural being exists and every 30 seconds creates a neutron at a point in space. How could you tell that the cause is supernatural and not natural? The most we could deduce is that at point x every 30 seconds a neutron appears. We have no idea why. It could be supernatural, or it could be natural and something we do not yet understand about the laws of physics.

Every time someone has said something has a supernatural cause, it has either later been found to have a natural cause, or is still not understood. E.g. Thunder being an angry god.


ps Atheism doesnt follow from naturalism necessarily, God could be natural. Even if a God did exist, you'd have no idea whether it was supernatural or not.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

omg not a wall of text!!

(didn't read much beyond the second line)

Major major problem: define nature and define what is outside of nature. Every time people say outside of nature it usually just means shit scientists haven't found yet.

[Mudhammam]

[pocaracas]

Why are you repeating what you did here:
https://atheistforums.org/thread-22329-page-3.html

??

I forgot that I when I had mentioned it in that other thread, it was the exact same argument. I thought this was a variatian of the point (I have had many tiring back and forths with him on this), not a verbatum repeat. It looks like it is. My apologies.

hehe... it happens... tese people do make us loose our marbles every now and then!

I'm not sure anyone believes the supernatural does definitely not exist. The burden of proof is on the person claiming the supernatural does exist. Without a complete knowledge of the laws of the universe (or possibly omniscience), one cannot determine whether something has a natural or supernatural cause. If you can't do this you have no good reason to believe in it.

Let's take an example. A supernatural being exists and every 30 seconds creates a neutron at a point in space. How could you tell that the cause is supernatural and not natural? The most we could deduce is that at point x every 30 seconds a neutron appears. We have no idea why. It could be supernatural, or it could be natural and something we do not yet understand about the laws of physics.

Every time someone has said something has a supernatural cause, it has either later been found to have a natural cause, or is still not understood. E.g. Thunder being an angry god.


ps Atheism doesnt follow from naturalism necessarily, God could be natural. Even if a God did exist, you'd have no idea whether it was supernatural or not.

He would then say, see, Naturalism is a faith because it cannot rationally justify the following (his list): 1. Nothing like God exists.

Can anyone rationally justify that a god exists?
Is there proof for it?

2. No miracles have ever occurred.

Why would someone have to justify the absence of something?

3. Natural processes are all that exist and account for why something exists rather than nothing (the universe), all events, our planet, life, our minds, and our beliefs. (However natural here is defined by the particular naturalist is apparently irrelevant to the argument).

Don't know.... scientists are working on it.

4. Determinism is true and there exists no human freedom. (Beliefs are determined as well).

Can anyone observe anything different?

5. All religion is human-made.

Sure look like that.

6. Human value is subjectively determined but an objective illusion.

Well, that depends on how you define "subjective" and "objective".
It depends on humans, yes.... but on the collective understanding of the value of each life...
If we define Objective as that which is accepted by the vast majority of elements in the group and subjective as that which a single element accepts, then... it is objective.

7. Ethics are subjectively determined but an objective illusion.

Again, depends on how you define subjective and objective...
See above description.

8. There is no life after death.

And why should I think there is?
I haven't ever seen any form of animal return from death... no human, no dog, no cat, no bird, no insect, no bacteria, and no virus.... have you?

9. The universe has no objective purpose or meaning.

Why should it have a purpose? much less an "objective purpose", whatever that means....

10. Every person's life has no objective purpose or meaning.

There's the collective purpose of maintaining the species and keep evolving... staying alive, like the beegees said.
Each individual has the purpose he/she attributes to him/her-self.

[bennyboy]

[Mudhammam]

[Bad Writer]

I feel for you. My entire family is made up of Mormons and Catholics. You can't reason with them, and you can't get them to stop watching Faux News. My mother, after a lengthy discussion on religion, gave me the copout reply of "I'm too old to change my ways," or, in other words, "I think you may have a valid point, but I'm too set in my ways to consider a new lifestyle."

[FreeTony]

He would then say, see, Naturalism is a faith because it cannot rationally justify the following (his list): 1. Nothing like God exists. 2. No miracles have ever occurred. 3. Natural processes are all that exist and account for why something exists rather than nothing (the universe), all events, our planet, life, our minds, and our beliefs. (However natural here is defined by the particular naturalist is apparently irrelevant to the argument). 4. Determinism is true and there exists no human freedom. (Beliefs are determined as well). 5. All religion is human-made. 6. Human value is subjectively determined but an objective illusion. 7. Ethics are subjectively determined but an objective illusion. 8. There is no life after death. 9. The universe has no objective purpose or meaning. 10. Every person's life has no objective purpose or meaning.

In my post I didn't say that the supernatural doesn't exist. I'm saying it is impossible to demonstrate that it does. I don't think I am making any assumptions about the existence of a supernatural realm.

The list doesn't make a lot of sense. Theists tend to do this as they are not generally interested in finding out what is/isn't true, rather they try to justify their own beliefs in any way they can. The list is a long argument from ignorance. "If you can't explain everything on my list, we must assume the supernatural exists".