A higher force

[Redbeard The Pink]

Virtually all of man's god-claims are specific/fictional enough to be demonstrated as fictional and/or impossible. The only way to make god even potentially plausible is to strip him down to being a "higher power," which to me seems to be defined as "a vague entity of some sort which defies any and all attempts at definition and description." The moment you accuse it of being/doing anything in particular, you start moving it into either the category of possible or impossible objects that either can or can't be shown to exist. For impossible objects, all you have to do is show how the object could not possibly exist, and for possible objects all you have to do is demand evidence of their existence. The only way to evade both of these problems is to be so vague with your god terminology as to entertain an endless dance of semantic fap-fuckery. I posit that a "higher power" does not exist in the natural universe because the term is virtually meaningless at worst and an abstract concept at best.

[Jenny A]

Meet the new age woo. It's even less well defined than the Biblical woo. If someone could please explain what a higher force is and how the universe would be in anyway different if it exists, I'd appreciate it. If it's someone who both can define it and believes in it, I'll be shocked. It's as useful as the everything is god notion which is about as useful as saying everything is everything.

[Mr.wizard]

Atheists do not rule out the possibility of a higher power or a god, they just do not see evidence for the existence of either, so there is no reason to believe.

I'm not sure why the need to linger on this point all the time, though. I see it more and more. Of course we can't rule some things out. You can't prove a negative, for one, and also we don't know everything about the cosmos for us to be able to be 100% certain about anything. That would be absurd. 

I'm not ruling God or higher powers out either. Not completely so, at least(but then, can you ever rule out non-specific things like that?). It's just that they're such ridiculous and bizarre claims that I might as well say they're false, for the sake of the argument. Many atheists seem to miss the point on this, namely that we wouldn't even be talking about such things if there weren't someone to bring them up in the first place - there's no need to be so anti-dogmatic that you come full circle and actually end up defending dogma.

What? I don't follow what your trying to say.

[Excited Penguin]

I'm not sure why the need to linger on this point all the time, though. I see it more and more. Of course we can't rule some things out. You can't prove a negative, for one, and also we don't know everything about the cosmos for us to be able to be 100% certain about anything. That would be absurd. 

I'm not ruling God or higher powers out either. Not completely so, at least(but then, can you ever rule out non-specific things like that?). It's just that they're such ridiculous and bizarre claims that I might as well say they're false, for the sake of the argument. Many atheists seem to miss the point on this, namely that we wouldn't even be talking about such things if there weren't someone to bring them up in the first place - there's no need to be so anti-dogmatic that you come full circle and actually end up defending dogma.

What? I don't follow what your trying to say.

To be honest, that might be because I didn't get how what you said related to what I had said in the OP.

[Pyrrho]

There is no higher force.  A bunch of fucking nearly hairless apes is about as good as it gets.  And that is why we need Scotch.  Lots and lots of Scotch.

[Excited Penguin]

There is no higher force.  A bunch of fucking nearly hairless apes is about as good as it gets.  And that is why we need Scotch.  Lots and lots of Scotch.

Cheers, mate!

[Mr.wizard]

What? I don't follow what your trying to say.

To be honest, that might be because I didn't get how what you said related to what I had said in the OP.

Atheist does not mean you rule out the possibility of a "god" or a "higher power", but since there is no evidence or a clear definition of either, then there is no reason to believe they exist. I'm not sure how the doesn't relate to the OP?

[The Valkyrie]

I'm open minded enough that I won't discount the possibility out of hand.

I'd require evidence, of course, lots of testable and verifiable evidence, that such a being/force/alien superpower exists.

[abaris]

I can go with a totally neutral force not caring at all. That's the only superior being that even remotely makes sense. Everything else, especially all the centered on human deities are ridiculous, since humanity is nothing but a fly farting in the universe's history.

[Excited Penguin]

To be honest, that might be because I didn't get how what you said related to what I had said in the OP.

Atheist does not mean you rule out the possibility of a "god" or a "higher power", but since there is no evidence or a clear definition of either, then there is no reason to believe they exist. I'm not sure how the doesn't relate to the OP?

I have no idea why you keep pointing out the obvious. I know what an atheist is, what I meant was, I found it worrying that some people allude in a serious tone to the possibility that such an ill-conceived thing might exist. People who should know better - if you think about it[at least I think so].