Is atheism logical?

[cantata]

Cantata:

Biology starts at the instant life started, not before. Just like astronomy starts at the instant of the Big Bang, not before.

Correct. That is not to say that there are not fields of science for what went on before life began, though. Biologists and organic chemists tend to get lumped with the work.

Abiogenesis speculates on how life may have started, but is not science, per se, because there is no way that this question can ever be answered scientifically.

No indeed, not for certain. No question can really be answered for certain. It can't be answered for certain by theology, either, of course.

We've never been able to make a single sustainable living cell- the closest we've ever got is Stanley Miller's experiment where he was able to take gases, zap them with electricity, and come up with more complex matter. Big deal- it wasn't life, and it wasn't sustaining.

Just because we haven't managed to do it doesn't mean that it is impossible for it to have occurred, or indeed that God must have done it instead.

But even if this were ever done, all it would do is allow scientists to say "Hooray- we know now how God did it- Praise the Lord!"

If they believe in God, that is. If they don't, they start asking the next question, and science fortunately continues.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Cantata:

Biology starts at the instant life started, not before. Just like astronomy starts at the instant of the Big Bang, not before.

Abiogenesis speculates on how life may have started, but is not science, per se, because there is no way that this question can ever be answered scientifically.

We've never been able to make a single sustainable living cell- the closest we've ever got is Stanley Miller's experiment where he was able to take gases, zap them with electricity, and come up with more complex matter. Big deal- it wasn't life, and it wasn't sustaining.

None of this means that atheism is not logical.

Nor is it the case that in the absence of proof of abiogenesis, we must conclude "God did it". That is a logical fallacy.

But even if this were ever done, all it would do is allow scientists to say "Hooray- we know now how God did it- Praise the Lord!"

Well, no. It wouldn't.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Servant of Jesus]

None of this means that atheism is not logical.

It is not logical to believe that in one instant there is nothing, and then- poof- there is an accidently formed, infinite Universe of infinite complexity. Now that takes faith!

Nor is it the case that in the absence of proof of abiogenesis, we must conclude "God did it". That is a logical fallacy.

It's only a logical fallacy if you're constrained by the rules of science, which can't deal with things we can't measure or observe.

But that is what I find so perplexing about denying the existence of God today- the evidence is all around you!

How can someone look at their computer screen and say "yes, this was invented and produced by intelligent human beings", and yet look at the infinitely more complex universe and deny that it was made by an intelligent universe maker.

 

[Negachrist]

Well then where did god come from?

And if god doesn't need someone to have created "him" (complete with penis?), then why does the universe need to have?

 

[TeddyKGB]

It is not logical to believe that in one instant there is nothing, and then- poof- there is an accidently formed, infinite Universe of infinite complexity. Now that takes faith!

It also barely resembles modern cosmology. Your <<staff edit>> summary contains at least three falsehoods: at no time is it claimed that "there is nothing"; the universe did not form in an instant; "infinite complexity," to the dubious degree that it means anything at all, is not a characteristic of the universe.

It's only a logical fallacy if you're constrained by the rules of science, which can't deal with things we can't measure or observe.

But that is what I find so perplexing about denying the existence of God today- the evidence is all around you!

<<staff edit>>

How can someone look at their computer screen and say "yes, this was invented and produced by intelligent human beings", and yet look at the infinitely more complex universe and deny that it was made by an intelligent universe maker.

That looks like an affirming the consequent fallacy. We do not reason that computer monitors are complex, therefore they are created by intelligent beings. We reason that computer monitors are created by intelligent beings because we know that humans design things, we know what characteristics human-designed things have, and computer monitors have hallmarks of human design.

Don't even try to argue that we can recognize design in the universe by a similar strategy. This "complexity" business is a typically misrepresented creationist bulwark, and it means exactly zilch outside of certain contexts.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

<<staff edit>>

<<staff edit>>

On the other hand, if you really are searching for answers, trying to find out more about what Christianity is all about, then carry on.

But try to do so more politely please.

 

[cantata]

Correction: this is a Christian forum. If you can't accept that, you really ought to have the decency to go elsewhere and not disrupt or undermine a site that seeks to honor God.

Christianforums.com > Mission > Discussion & Debate > Philosophy > Is atheism logical?

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Christianforums.com > Mission > Discussion & Debate > Philosophy > Is atheism logical?

CHRISTIANforums.com

Being considerate

 

[cantata]

CHRISTIANforums.com

Being considerate

Atheists are invited to participate in this forum, and this is a thread about the beliefs and ideas of non-theists. Should non-theists not present their arguments here, especially when this thread was started by a Christian to challenge their ideas?

You presented a poor argument in the Philosophy section of Christian Forums, and you should expect that your argument will be attacked. It has nothing to do with your religious affiliations and everything to do with your fallacious line of reasoning. Stop hiding behind God and being 'persecuted' and stand up for yourself.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

You presented a poor argument in the Philosophy section of Christian Forums, and you should expect that your argument will be attacked. It has nothing to do with your religious affiliations and everything to do with your fallacious line of reasoning. Stop hiding behind God and being 'persecuted' and stand up for yourself.

Oh- and in your opinion, what part of my argument was "poor", and where was there a "fallacious line of reasoning" again, in your opinion.

 

[cantata]

Oh- and in your opinion, what part of my argument was "poor", and where was there a "fallacious line of reasoning" again, in your opinion.

That's TeddyKGB's fight, not mine. Take it up with him; I refuse to be baited.

By the way, if your reasoning is fallacious, it's not mere opinion that it is so; it is fact. Another hallmark of poor reasoning right there.

 

[Tenka]

How can you justify existance without a divine Creator?

I don't justify it, I accept it.

How did the heavens and the earth come to form out of a vast expanse of nothing?

This is an archaic understanding of the formation of our universe.
What you ask did not happen.

Surely there was a divine beginning and initial creation set in motion by a higher power.

I think inventing such a being only multiplies what we are unable to explain. It is best to say "I don't know" rather than start inventing characters such as gods for which there is no direct evidence.

So yes, atheism is logical.

Atheism to me is not at all Logical... and GOD is an eternal being, no beginning, no end!

Energy is, as far as we know, eternal. It is from the condensation of energy we get matter which our universe is made from.
Energy does the same thing as gods but without the need to attach useless baggage such as personality, motives and such assorted mythology to it.
Therefore atheism is the most logical position.

 

[Eudaimonist]

It is not logical to believe that in one instant there is nothing, and then- poof- there is an accidently formed, infinite Universe of infinite complexity. Now that takes faith!

I agree. And that is not my view. That doesn't sound like anyone's view -- it is a strawman.

It's only a logical fallacy if you're constrained by the rules of science, which can't deal with things we can't measure or observe.

No... I don't think you understand my point. The failure to prove one position does not mean that another position is proved. This is a principle of logic, not of science.

But that is what I find so perplexing about denying the existence of God today- the evidence is all around you!

No, it isn't. It really isn't. I see clear signs of a self-contained natural universe. The evidence is all around you.

How can someone look at their computer screen and say "yes, this was invented and produced by intelligent human beings", and yet look at the infinitely more complex universe and deny that it was made by an intelligent universe maker.

Because not everything that exists and has complexity must have been designed. We know this clearly from biology, and other sciences.

We also know in advance that computers are designed, but we don't know that the universe must have been designed. I don't think this is a valid analogy.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[TeddyKGB]

Correction: this is a Christian forum. If you can't accept that, you really ought to have the decency to go elsewhere and not disrupt or undermine a site that seeks to honor God.

I can get standard apologetics and feel-good pablum elsewhere in this vast place. Those of us who value philosophy should expect, demand even, a more sophisticated level of discourse; we're trying to get at the very foundations of knowledge, after all. We're here because we're not satisfied by the fluffy answers that provide mere emotional support.

On the other hand, if you really are searching for answers, trying to find out more about what Christianity is all about, then carry on.

I can learn about everyday Christianity on at least a half-dozen other forums. I want to know about Christian epistemologies and ontologies and how they support them.

But try to do so more politely please.

I'll try.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

So the original question was: is atheism logical?

Logical (American Heritage Dictionary)

1. Of, relating to, in accordance with, or of the nature of logic.

2. Based on earlier or otherwise known statements, events, or conditions; reasonable: Rain was a logical expectation, given the time of year.

3. Reasoning or capable of reasoning in a clear and consistent manner.

Logic: (Dictionary.com Unabridged)

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.

2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.

3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.

4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.

5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Atheism: (American Heritage Dictionary):

1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.

2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

So logically, there is a universe, there are flowers, there is life.

I submit that the very existence of the universe, flowers and life means they must have been created. I also submit that the order inherent in these items means they must have been created by an intelligent universe maker, flower maker, life maker.

I call that intelligent universe, flower, life maker God. I submit acknowledging the presence of God is the beginning of wisdom.

 

[cantata]

So logically, there is a universe, there are flowers, there is life.

You know this logically? I don't. I know it empirically - by observation.

I submit that the very existence of the universe, flowers and life means they must have been created.

Why? What experience do you have of things coming to existence for you to reason that things which exist must have been created?

I also submit that the order inherent in these items means they must have been created by an intelligent universe maker, flower maker, life maker.

Why?

I call that intelligent universe, flower, life maker God.

Good for you...

I submit acknowledging the presence of God is the beginning of wisdom.

Why?

None of this is logical at all.

 

[Army of Juan]

So logically, there is a universe, there are flowers, there is life.

I submit that the very existence of the universe, flowers and life means they must have been created. I also submit that the order inherent in these items means they must have been created by an intelligent universe maker, flower maker, life maker.

I call that intelligent universe, flower, life maker God. I submit acknowledging the presence of God is the beginning of wisdom.

What you have here is a logical fallacy, argumentum ad ignorantiam.

 

[DeathMagus]

So logically, there is a universe, there are flowers, there is life.

Nope. You don't know what logic is. The universe, flowers, and life are known to exist through empiricism. Logic does not enter into it.

I submit that the very existence of the universe, flowers and life means they must have been created. I also submit that the order inherent in these items means they must have been created by an intelligent universe maker, flower maker, life maker.

I call that intelligent universe, flower, life maker God. I submit acknowledging the presence of God is the beginning of wisdom.

Whatever gets you through the day. Of course, without qualification and reasoning for backup, your claims are absolutely worthless outside of your own life and world view.

You can't establish universal truth from personal beliefs. All you can establish is personal truth - AKA "opinion."