The Achilles Heel of Atheism

[Cearbhall]

Can those two terms even exist side by side like that?

WHY YOU MAKE BRAIN HURT?! XD

Oh, yeah, I agree that it's weird, but it basically means that I don't think we know enough to know if there's a higher being, but if you held me at gunpoint and told me I had to choose, I'd say that there isn't.

Here's a pretty diagram:

 

[Eudaimonist]

But neither atheist nor theists is as free and as liberal as the deist. Deist is the only one which can comply fully to both parties thus allowing more radical forms of thought to occur.

No offense, but Deism strikes me as very boring -- almost as much as atheism. But if you find it fun, more power to you.

The theist wants pie(god) and the atheist wants cake(naturalistic reason). I want both . Us Deist are a greedy people

eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[EnemyOfReason]

No offense, but Deism strikes me as very boring -- almost as much as atheism. But if you find it fun, more power to you.

No offense taken. I just don;t understand how having naturalism and theism at the same time is boring. Perhaps your thinking of modern Deism. Not sure

eudaimonia,

Mark

IT CAN"T BE TRUE! YOU LIE! THE PIE MUST BE REAL!

 

[lupusFati]

Oh, yeah, I agree that it's weird, but it basically means that I don't think we know enough to know if there's a higher being, but if you held me at gunpoint and told me I had to choose, I'd say that there isn't.

Here's a pretty diagram:

Pretty diagrams make everything better.
Alright I see what you mean by 'agnostic atheist' at least. Makes sense I suppose.

 

[Cearbhall]

No offense, but Deism strikes me as very boring -- almost as much as atheism. But if you find it fun, more power to you.

It sounds pretty fun for the watchmaker, to be honest.

 

[Eudaimonist]

It sounds pretty fun for the watchmaker, to be honest.

I suppose so! Maybe I should be in that line of work. Guess I didn't win the cosmic lottery.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[EnemyOfReason]

delete

 

[EnemyOfReason]

I suppose so! Maybe I should be in that line of work. Guess I didn't win the cosmic lottery.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Your post is 666 Ironic I may say

 

[lupusFati]

Your post is 666 Ironic I may say

Still a number though. Not like it has any mystical juju powers.

...Still kind of funny.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Your post is 666 Ironic I may say

Or is it?

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Nice looking picture, but one question?

Who are the people in the blue and black areas

 

[Satt]

Nice looking picture, but one question?

Who are the people in the blue and black areas

I think the people in the blue area are people that aren't afraid to simply say "I don't know".

 

[Gadarene]

Nice looking picture, but one question?

Who are the people in the blue and black areas

Pyrrhonists and positivists?

 

[Tnmusicman]

Your comparison would be valid if you knew of a parallel universe in which God exists and therefore concluded that he exists in this one.

Yes but I'm not talking about God existing . I'm talking about atheists who claim alien life is possible when there is zero evidence for alien life. They deny God exists based on the same criteria. Why is belief in aliens more likely than God? Sure, the whole probability issue but probability isn't actuality. It doesn't really matter if God actually exists in this argument because we are talking about why Gods existence is denied.
Perhaps I'm not reading you right......

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Yes but I'm not talking about God existing . I'm talking about atheists who claim alien life is possible when there is zero evidence for alien life. They deny God exists based on the same criteria. Why is belief in aliens more likely than God? Sure, the whole probability issue but probability isn't actuality. It doesn't really matter if God actually exists in this argument because we are talking about why Gods existence is denied.

Well, using Baye's theorem, we have at least one example of life, therefore a probability becomes a possibility. Given the fact there are billions of galaxies, with trillions of stars, the likelihood of life existing elsewhere is not so impossible to consider.

As for the existence of a god, you don't have any prior probabilities.

 

[Belk]

Yes but I'm not talking about God existing . I'm talking about atheists who claim alien life is possible when there is zero evidence for alien life. They deny God exists based on the same criteria. Why is belief in aliens more likely than God? Sure, the whole probability issue but probability isn't actuality. It doesn't really matter if God actually exists in this argument because we are talking about why Gods existence is denied.
Perhaps I'm not reading you right......

It is not the lack of evidence for alien life but the plethora of evidence for life that is behind it.

 

[Cearbhall]

Yes but I'm not talking about God existing . I'm talking about atheists who claim alien life is possible when there is zero evidence for alien life. They deny God exists based on the same criteria. Why is belief in aliens more likely than God? Sure, the whole probability issue but probability isn't actuality. It doesn't really matter if God actually exists in this argument because we are talking about why Gods existence is denied.
Perhaps I'm not reading you right......

You're not understanding what I'm saying. We live on a planet that allows for life, and we know for a fact that there are a mind-boggling number of planets in the universe. Accepting that there's probably life on another planet is a mathematical conclusion. It is purely based on observations. The only statement that doesn't fit with being an atheist is the claim that there is definitely intelligent life on another planet.

I don't know why you're connecting the existence of cosmic bodies that could sustain life to a belief in deities. Is this like when people try to debunk science and logic by saying it's just another faith?

 

[Tnmusicman]

You're not understanding what I'm saying. We live on a planet that allows for life, and we know for a fact that there are a mind-boggling number of planets in the universe. Accepting that there's probably life on another planet is a mathematical conclusion. It is purely based on observations. The only statement that doesn't fit with being an atheist is the claim that there is definitely intelligent life on another planet.

I don't know why you're connecting the existence of cosmic bodies that could sustain life to a belief in deities. Is this like when people try to debunk science and logic by saying it's just another faith?

I'm not connecting anything! Look, let's make it simple. I have already conceded there is possibly life on other planets. I don't say there is for sure because there is no observable evidence of that claim --only a mathmatical possibility. You can say probability if it makes you feel better.

Someone mentioned the issue with alien life and I simply was asking why an atheist would say "there's probably life on other planets based on mathmatics"
even though there is no hard core evidence of it yet use the same criteria for God (being there's no evidence for God). It makes perfect sense from a theist POV to ask why someone would believe alien life is probable with no evidence (that can be put in a test tube or looked at or smelled or touched) but believe that God is NOT possible?? Considering there is the same amount of empirical evidence for both I didn't understand why alien life was "so much more believable" when there was the same amount of evidence but I understand what the argument is (concerning life) but I still don't fully buy into it. Sure, there's all the probability and so forth but probability does not equal actuality. Has one observed alien life? Some think they have. Considering most alien appearances have been debunked doesn't fill me with confidence.

If your answer is because of the mathmatical probability then fine. You are supposedly adding weight to your belief because there is life on this planet. Okay, so I understand your answer then. Thank you for responding.

 

[Tnmusicman]

You're not understanding what I'm saying. We live on a planet that allows for life, and we know for a fact that there are a mind-boggling number of planets in the universe. Accepting that there's probably life on another planet is a mathematical conclusion. It is purely based on observations. The only statement that doesn't fit with being an atheist is the claim that there is definitely intelligent life on another planet.

I don't know why you're connecting the existence of cosmic bodies that could sustain life to a belief in deities. Is this like when people try to debunk science and logic by saying it's just another faith?

See that's the thing. From the theist side of the argument the proposition that alien life is possible isn't a stretch. Some will claim God is an alien (which could be argued for) so that's not a problem. However, it is a bit telling to put your faith in the alien argument when you have zero proof. You say it's logical based on probability. Okay, fine but to a theist it's very logical to believe in God. There are a number of great arguments for the existence of God. To us, you are doing the same thing. Until someone provides proof of alien life you are in the same boat as theists on this one (at least in my opinion).

 

[TheBeardedDude]

No one is saying that the statistics prove life exists. The statistics indicate that the probability is not 0 and approaches 1 as the number of planets that may be suitable for containing life increases.

Which means it is not unreasonable to look.