Atheism worships a dead god.

[Edwardo Piet]

God almost certainly doesn't exist. He's about as likely as Santa Claus. There's no reason to worry about God's existence.

If God exists then the reality is true to both the existentialist and the atheist. There's no reason to worry about it either way.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

God almost certainly doesn't exist. He's about as likely as Santa Claus. There's no reason to worry about God's existence.

If God exists then the reality is true to both the existentialist and the atheist. There's no reason to worry about it either way.

Santa Claus is at least based on some historical person (Saint Nicholus, if I recall correctly). That's means "Santa Claus" is at least based on someone who may be a real person.
That's more than some of hte most prominant people in the bible.

[Existentialist]

God almost certainly doesn't exist. He's about as likely as Santa Claus. There's no reason to worry about God's existence.

If God exists then the reality is true to both the existentialist and the atheist. There's no reason to worry about it either way.

What reality? If the rationalistic atheist meets God, he meets someone whose non-existence defines human freedom, therefore human freedom disappears at the meeting. An existential atheist meets someone who makes no difference to human freedom one way or another. That's the reason to worry about it. Not that either the rationalistic atheist nor the existentialist atheist thinks that God does exist. It's just, what would happen if he did? Denial of the question is the easiest route for the rationalist, not least because most people seem happy with it!

---

Santa Claus is at least based on some historical person (Saint Nicholus, if I recall correctly). That's means "Santa Claus" is at least based on someone who may be a real person.
That's more than some of hte most prominant people in the bible.

True, but then, aren't we veering further away from the most important question - what would it mean to us if, contrary to all our expectations, god really does exist?

[Edwardo Piet]

What reality?

The reality of if God existed.

If the rationalistic atheist meets God, he meets someone whose non-existence defines human freedom, therefore human freedom disappears at the meeting.

Non-existence? I thought we were talking about the infinitesimally small chance that atheism is wrong. If the Christian God exists then everyone has to face that reality after they die, not just atheists.

Yet now you talk of God's non-existence effecting people. If he doesn't exist he doesn't effect anyone for he isn't there to do any effecting.

It's just, what would happen if he did?

If the Christian God exists it makes no difference whether you're an existentialist or not because everybody would be equally powerless compared to his will.

by his Denial of the question is the easiest route for the rationalist, not least because most people seem happy with it!

What would happen if God existed? Whatever he wants to happen if he's truly omnipotent. It makes no difference whether we're an existentialist or not.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

True, but then, aren't we veering further away from the most important question - what would it mean to us if, contrary to all our expectations, god really does exist?

Then there are a lot of things he has to answer for.

Of course, if this were the old testiment god from the bible, then it wouldn't matter because he'd enslave us all or damn us with no middle ground to some kind of torture.

So anything more specific than that really depends on which god and what god can or cannot do, among other things I'm likely overlooking.

[Existentialist]

Non-existence? I thought we were talking about the infinitesimally small chance that atheism is wrong. If the Christian God exists then everyone has to face that reality after they die, not just atheists. Yet now you talk of God's non-existence effecting people. If he doesn't exist he doesn't effect anyone for he isn't there to do any effecting. If the Christian God exists it makes no difference whether you're an existentialist or not because everybody would be equally powerless compared to his will. What would happen if God existed? Whatever he wants to happen if he's truly omnipotent. It makes no difference whether we're an existentialist or not.

The existence or non-existence of God doesn't need to be quantified if you take the position that God does not exist and you seek to explore the full consequences of a consistently atheistic position, though I realise rationalist atheists like to think in terms of estimates of probability and instinctively place the probability of God's existence as probably very small, though I never see any calculations that back this up. And of course the idea of god's existence affects people, so the idea of his non-existence also has consequences not least as we emerge from a highly theistic social history. The existentialist atheist asserts that an existing god's omnipotence is his business, we have our own to be getting on with. The rationalist atheist subordinates himself to God the moment god's existence is proved. That's a pretty big difference.

[Edwardo Piet]

The existence or non-existence of God doesn't need to be quantified if you take the position that God does not exist and you seek to explore the full consequences of a consistently atheistic position,

I take the position that God is highly improbable because he is highly complex and supernatural and lacking hugely in evidence that would be required of him. I don't take the position that he simply doesn't exist because that would be dishonest of me when I don't believe I can absolutely know he doesn't exist when I don't have absolute proof of this.

though I realise rationalist atheists like to think in terms of estimates of probability and instinctively place the probability of God's existence as probably very small,

Very small indeed! However fine tuned this universe is God would have to be even more fine tuned or in other words complex if he created it. And so his existence demands mountains of evidence. And I don't know of any. I don't know how there can even be any. He's so complex and confused

though I never see any calculations that back this up.

See above.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

I realise rationalist atheists like to think in terms of estimates of probability

Really? I didn't know that. But then that's a flavour of atheist with which I'm unfamiliar.

Not something I do. A skeptic and secular humanist, I'm also an agnostic atheist as a result. I assert only "I do not believe in god(s). (due to lack of evidence). I don't make semantic or statistical speculations about probability.

I freely admit I may be wrong. I'm ready to change my position immediately anyone manages to prove or falsify the existence of God(s). In the meantime, I live day-to-day as if there is no God.

[Existentialist]

I take the position that God is highly improbable because he is highly complex and supernatural and lacking hugely in evidence that would be required of him.

Probability isn't usually calculated on the basis of the complexity of the alleged thing being observed. If God existed outside the observable universe, he could hide all evidence of his existence. There's no basis for making an estimate of probability about the existence of god, so we have to look to other thought processes to decide our responses to the theory of his existence.

---

[quote='padraic' pid='89688' dateline='1282785407']

I'm an agnostic atheist

I'm an atheist atheist.

[Edwardo Piet]

Probability isn't usually calculated on the basis of the complexity of the alleged thing being observed. If God existed outside the observable universe, he could hide all evidence of his existence. There's no basis for making an estimate of probability about the existence of god, so we have to look to other thought processes to decide our responses to the theory of his existence.

Complexity requires explanation. And the more complex, the bigger an explanation required and the more improbable its existence will be if it lacks one.

I'm an agnostic atheist

I'm an atheist atheist.

What do you mean? Are you saying you're not an agnostic atheist? Agnostic=without gnosticism. So if you're not an agnostic atheist and you're an atheist you must be a gnostic atheist. So do you deny the possibility of God's existence? I think not, based on what you said earlier you seem to indicate otherwise. So I bet you are an agnostic atheist. So you confuse me.