Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

orubiru · 09-03-2015 07:33PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

As for "you cannot prove a negative" that's a logical fallacy. If someone claims no money exists in their wallet, and shows you an empty wallet, they have just proved a negative. [FALSE ANALOGY]

In this particular discussion it is impossible to see inside the wallet. So, your analogy fails.

If you tell me that you have 500 Euros in your wallet but the complication is that you can't open the wallet then I am simply going to say "well maybe you do have 500 Euro in there and maybe you don't". You would then say "well, can you prove that I don't have 500 Euros".

That's true. I can't prove that you don't but WHY would I believe that you do?

Nobody can prove that God does not exist.

However, it is possible to justify a lack of belief in God because there is no evidence supporting the existence of God.

You seem determined to go right ahead with this idea of "proving Atheism" even though it has been explained over and over that Atheism is not a belief that there is no God, it is a lack of belief in God.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 07:38PM

TheLurker wrote: »

We are evidence for alien life. If life could develop on a planet like ours it is reasonable to suppose that it could happen again, given the size of the universe. The idea that people just randomly believe alien life might exist without any reason (aka faith) is not accurate at all.

Alien life is life that does not originate from Earth. It is also called Extra-terrestrial life. Find one credible scientific link that evidence of alien life exists. Then we can give you this years Nobel prize, as the first discoverer of evidence for alien life.

TheLurker wrote: »

I'm beginning to suspect what is needed here is a discussion on what 'evidence' actually is.

I would suspect what’s needed far more here is a dictionary and a little read up on logical fallacies.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 07:42PM

orubiru wrote: »

In this particular discussion it is impossible to see inside the wallet. So, your analogy fails. [FALSE]

If you tell me that you have 500 Euros in your wallet but the complication is that you can't open the wallet [FALSE - he just did and it was empty]

Nobody can prove that God does not exist.

However, it is possible to justify a lack of belief in God because there is no evidence supporting the existence of God.[FALSE - can you prove there is no evidence anywhere ?]

You seem determined to go right ahead with this idea of "proving Atheism" even though it has been explained over and over that Atheism is not a belief that there is no God, it is a lack of belief in God.[FALSE - ad hominem ]

They just showed me their empty wallet

orubiru · 09-03-2015 07:42PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

A slightly better quality post/argument. Good. At least you were trying.

How condescending.

"There is no reasonable evidence any of these supposed beings actually exist. By reasonable evidence I mean evidence that is not simply the assertions of those who believe they do.

Hence atheism."

This is what is termed a typical Non sequitur fallacy in logic, i.e. an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.

Um... NO. If the evidence is not reasonable then there are no grounds for holding the belief therefore Atheism by default.

It's Atheism by definition.

If you fail to prove that Jesus or God exists then the person you are trying to convince is not choosing Atheism. In fact, your failure to provide evidence to support the belief simply confirms their Atheism.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 07:44PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

They just showed me their empty wallet

Yes. They showed you proof to support their claim that they had no money.

So lets say that you believe Jesus said “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

Can you prove that Jesus said this? Can you show me the wallet?

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 07:46PM

orubiru wrote: »

How condescending.

[FALSE - ad hominem ]

Um... NO. If the evidence is not reasonable then there are no grounds for holding the belief therefore Atheism by default.

It's Atheism by definition. [FALSE dilemma ]

If you fail to prove that Jesus or God exists then the person you are trying to convince is not choosing Atheism. In fact, your failure to provide evidence to support the belief simply confirms their Atheism. [FALSE arguement ]

God can exist with or with out me, so quit the logical fallacies

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 07:48PM

orubiru wrote: »

Yes. They showed you proof to support their claim that they had no money.

Exactly - They claimed they had no money, and they proved that negative.

Look up "you cant prove a negative" logical fallacy 101.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 07:54PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

God can exist with or with out me, so quit the logical fallacies

Yes but you cannot prove that God exists.
So you can not convince me that God exists.
It follows that I lack a belief in God.
Therefore I am an Atheist.

beerpong · 09-03-2015 07:57PM

Which God? If nature is a living breathing thing of great complexity and mysteries, can it be a God? Or the Juda Christian belief in one white man God that intervenes on a individual basis and left a list of rules?
I'm all for getting back to praising nature before we bring more species to extinction in our short run to total annihilation.
Nature and mystery exist, man gods most certainly not, unless we are all in the matrix created by some jealous, irrational, prepubescent monster man child. Why create the whole universe to observe a few apes and make sure they are not putting their willies in the wrong place or cutting hair from their temples.
If, as children, you were not thought these lies you would find them as humorous and as horrifying as me. Although humans throughout the ages have seemed to find a knowledge that there is something more out there, can it be it is the connection with our planet and universe which created us. We came from nature and our planet is a living system, it is only right we identify with nature and spiritual things, do not let others usurp these feelings to control and manipulate you.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 07:58PM

orubiru wrote: »

Yes but you cannot prove that God exists.
So you can not convince me that God exists.

Another false inference.
I've no interest in doing so, never had, never will.

orubiru wrote: »

It follows that I lack a belief in God.
Therefore I am an Atheist.

That's another Non sequitur fallacy, and you're back to making about it the poster not the subject, which is the fallacy of ad hominem. You managed two in one there.

God may or may not exist, whether you or I exist or not.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:16PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Exactly - They claimed they had no money, and they proved that negative.

Look up "you cant prove a negative" logical fallacy 101.

You are confused.

You equate "I have money" to "I believe that God exists"
You equate "I have no money" to "I believe that God does not exist"

I do not know if God exists or not BUT there is no evidence that God exists so I lack belief in God.

Your wallet analogy only works if we can confirm one way or the other. There is either money in the wallet or there is not. We need to look inside the wallet to confirm.

Since we can't "look inside the wallet" with God. Your attempts to use logical reasoning break down because it's not possible to confirm the positive OR the negative.

If you can't confirm the positive then how can I believe it? I can't therefore I am without belief in the positive.

However, what about the negative? Well, I can't confirm the negative either. So where does that leave me?

Well, since Atheism is a lack of belief in the positive I am an Atheist by default when I lack belief in the positive assertion that God exists. I am not saying that I believe the negative to be True I am saying that I don't know either way.

If I don't know either way then I don't believe in God therefore I am an Atheist.

You are using logical arguments where there is only True or False. This would be fine but unfortunately "I don't know" is a possibility here and if someone cannot be convinced to believe in True or False then by default they do not believe in True.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:19PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

God may or may not exist, whether you or I exist or not.

If someone does not believe in God then they are an Atheist whether God exists or not.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:24PM

orubiru wrote: »

You are confused. [FALSE - Ad hominem]

You equate "I have money" to "I believe that God exists"
You equate "I have no money" to "I believe that God does not exist"

[FALSE Strawman- I don't, the discusison was in realtion to the fallacious claim, you cannot prove a negative earlier]

I do not know if God exists or not BUT there is no evidence that God exists so I lack belief in God.

Your wallet analogy only works if we can confirm one way or the other. There is either money in the wallet or there is not. We need to look inside the wallet to confirm.

Since we can't "look inside the wallet" with God. Your attempts to use logical reasoning break down because it's not possible to confirm the positive OR the negative. [FALSE claim]

If you can't confirm the positive then how can I believe it? I can't therefore I am without belief in the positive. [FALSE dilema fallacy]

However, what about the negative? Well, I can't confirm the negative either. So where does that leave me? [it leaves you with neither]

Well, since Atheism is a lack of belief in the positive I am an Atheist by default when I lack belief in the positive assertion that God exists. I am not saying that I believe the negative to be True I am saying that I don't know either way.

If I don't know either way then I don't believe in God therefore I am an Atheist. [Non sequitur]

You are using logical arguments where there is only True or False. [False] This would be fine but unfortunately "I don't know" is a possibility here and if someone cannot be convinced to believe in True or False then by default they do not believe in True. [False claim again]

Go read up on contructing a logical argument and come back to us.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:25PM

orubiru wrote: »

If someone does not believe in God then they are an Atheist whether God exists or not.

false dichotomy fallacy

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:28PM

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Ah...but what if the money is invisible, or immaterial?

I am not sure that Cen Taurus quite understands this.

Though they are not the only one. I only recently started posting on these kinds of threads and a lot of it just seems to be explaining that Atheism is not a belief. It's not a faith based position. It's not saying "there is no God".

How can you explain to someone that when Schrödinger's Cat is put inside the box if you don't believe the cat is alive (and how could you?) it doesn't automatically follow that you believe the cat is dead?

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:29PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

false dichotomy fallacy

Actually, can you expand on that a bit?

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:32PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Go read up on contructing a logical argument and come back to us.

A logical argument for what?

You are being deliberately elusive.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:33PM

orubiru wrote: »

I am not sure that Cen Taurus quite understands this.

More ad hominem fallacy. You seem incapable of making a post or any point without making it about a poster.

If you have a single properly constructed argument, with no false premises, and no fallacies, lets hear it for a change.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:34PM

orubiru wrote: »

Actually, can you expand on that a bit?

No I haven't time to teach you very basic logic, if you are not prepared to even look it up.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:35PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

More ad hominem fallacy. You seem incapable of making a post or any point without making it about a poster.

If you have a properly constructed argument, with no false premises, and no fallacies, lets hear it for a change.

How is wondering if you actually understand "ad hominem fallacy"?

I have asked you many times and argument for what?

You don't answer the question. What should I be arguing for?

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:36PM

orubiru wrote: »

How is wondering if you actually understand "ad hominem fallacy"?

I have asked you many times and argument for what?

You don't answer the question. What should I be arguing for?

Your claims, the ones posted, then denied, then posted again, then denied.
Would you like me to post them again for you ?

Go on please say yes !

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:38PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

No I haven't time to teach you very basic logic, if you are not prepared to even look it up.

Oh, I know exactly what it means I am just pretty interested in how you would explain the statement below as "false dichotomy fallacy"?

If someone does not believe in God then they are an Atheist whether God exists or not.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:43PM

orubiru wrote: »

Oh, I know exactly what it means I am just pretty interested in how you would explain the statement below as "false dichotomy fallacy"?

If someone does not believe in God then they are an Atheist whether God exists or not.

Well if you do that's worse, as you'll know you're attempting to present the only other choice to theism is atheism, whereas it can be a range of other things from deism, to pantheism, or simply be "I don't know".

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:44PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Your claims, the ones posted, then denied, then posted again, then denied.
Would you like me to post them again for you ? Go on please say yes !

OK. Here is my revised List of Claims.

A person who lacks belief in God is an Atheist.

There is currently no evidence for the existence of God.

Because there is no evidence for Gods existence, I cannot believe in God.

I lack a belief in God.

I do not believe that there is No God. I do not know either way. This still leaves me without a belief in God.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:46PM

orubiru wrote: »

OK. Here is my revised List of Claims.

A person who lacks belief in God is an Atheist.

There is currently no evidence for the existence of God.

Because there is no evidence for Gods existence, I cannot believe in God.

Again a false claim.

First you'll have to prove your premise that no evidence exists anywhere.

Secondly, There is no evidence found to date that alien life exists, yet plenty of people can and do believe it does.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:49PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Well if you do that's worse, as you'll know you're attempting to present the only other choice to theism is atheism, whereas it can be a range of other things from deism, to pantheism, or simply be "I don't know".

Again, you are making the error that Theism and Atheism are the sort of "mirror image" belief systems.

The problem is not with the logic or the arguments being made the problem is with your failure to understand the logic and the arguments.

You simply do not understand what Atheism is and that is a bit of a disadvantage when you enter in to a discussion on Atheism.

Cen taurus · 09-03-2015 08:53PM

orubiru wrote: »

Again, you are making the error that Theism and Atheism are the sort of "mirror image" belief systems.

Actually that was your false dichotomy not mine, and I had to point out to you that there are a range of other options from Deism, to Pantheism, to simply not knowing.

RikuoAmero · 09-03-2015 08:55PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Again a false claim.

First you'll have to prove your premise that no evidence exists anywhere.

Secondly, There is no evidence found to date that alien life exists, yet plenty of people can and do believe it does.

If they're people like me, who suspect that it is likely there is alien life, given the size of the universe and the high number of places where life could form, that's one thing. That's a basic claim, we're not saying anything more than that. We're not making claims on what those life-forms may be, what their shape may be, what they look like or what they think (if they think at all).
If you get people who say they know there is alien life, and more importantly, can tell you about it, can tell you details, suddenly that's when we've entered the realm where we must demand evidence.

Your god claim is like the second camp. You believe in God, and more importantly, you believe in a specific god with specific characteristics and attributes. Somehow, like those people who can tell me how many eyes the aliens have, you are somehow able to tell us not only that there is a God but what that God is like.

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:56PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Again a false claim. E.g. There is no evidence that alien life exists, yet plenty of people can and do believe it does.

How is it a false claim? I, personally, cannot believe in God because there is no evidence that God exists.

You are telling me that my reasons for not being able to believe are false?

It has ALREADY been explained to you that the hypothesis that alien life exists on other planets is supported by the FACT that life exists on this planet.

Life exists on Earth. Earth is a planet. There are other planets. There are many other planets. Statistically, there may be other planets like Earth. So, the hypothesis that alien life exists on another planet is supported by the fact that life exists on this planet.

What do we have that supports the hypothesis that God exists? Why should I believe that hypothesis?

orubiru · 09-03-2015 08:57PM

Cen taurus wrote: »

Actually that was your false dichotomy not mine, and I had to point out to you that there are a range of other options from Deism, to Pantheism, to simply not knowing.

Do Deists and Pantheists believe in God(s)?

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

Comments