Topic: How can we atheists be so sure God doesn't exist?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #16,132
Doesn't that take an act of faith to not believe just as it does to believe?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later[^] [v] #278,622
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 52 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #278,624
1. Most atheists are agnostic atheist. We're not sure God doesn't exist. Anyone who claims to know with 100% certainty is taking a faith position.2. Pic related.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 42 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,677
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 59 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,680
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,682
@278,624 (C)
But you can say that about anything.
Anyone who doesn't believe in an invisible pink unicorn is certainly taking a faith position.
Why should god get special treatment?
But you can say that about anything.
Anyone who doesn't believe in an invisible pink unicorn is certainly taking a faith position.
Why should god get special treatment?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,683
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,691
@278,682 (D)
> Anyone who doesn't believe in an invisible pink unicorn is certainly taking a faith position.
No, they're not. Not believing in the unicorn is not the same as believing the unicorn doesn't exist. Lack of belief (which is what atheism is) is not necessarily a *positive* belief that God doesn't exist.
Gnostic atheists (or atheist gnostics?) are those who hold no belief in a deity but claim they're certain their lack of belief is correct, but I have never met such a person. Saying you know for sure God, or the pink unicorn, doesn't exist is just as ignorant as saying you know for sure it *does* exist.
Equally, there are agnostic theists although every theist I've ever met has said they're 100% sure they know their God exists, for whatever reason.
> Anyone who doesn't believe in an invisible pink unicorn is certainly taking a faith position.
No, they're not. Not believing in the unicorn is not the same as believing the unicorn doesn't exist. Lack of belief (which is what atheism is) is not necessarily a *positive* belief that God doesn't exist.
Gnostic atheists (or atheist gnostics?) are those who hold no belief in a deity but claim they're certain their lack of belief is correct, but I have never met such a person. Saying you know for sure God, or the pink unicorn, doesn't exist is just as ignorant as saying you know for sure it *does* exist.
Equally, there are agnostic theists although every theist I've ever met has said they're 100% sure they know their God exists, for whatever reason.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,695
There is a difference between faith and belief. I believe god doesn't exist becuase there is no proof. Faith requires belief in the absence of evidence, not the other way around.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,701
@278,691 (C)
But why does god get special consideration? You can say that you don't believe in the existence of the invisible unicorn no problem, but if you say you don't believe in an invisible sky man then some people will disagree and look down on you for taking "an extreme position".
God only gets special consideration because lots of people believe in him. If lots of people believed on the unicorn instead then this whole thing would be backwards.
But why does god get special consideration? You can say that you don't believe in the existence of the invisible unicorn no problem, but if you say you don't believe in an invisible sky man then some people will disagree and look down on you for taking "an extreme position".
God only gets special consideration because lots of people believe in him. If lots of people believed on the unicorn instead then this whole thing would be backwards.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,715
@previous (D)
Say I told you a unicorn was in my house, sitting at the table. You enter and see nothing - the logical thing for you to do now is believe I'm lying, *positively* believe my Unicorn does not exist.
But say I then decide to say "ah, but this is a special unicorn! It's invisible, you cannot see it!". Things have changed now. The logical thing for you to do in this situation is simply disbelieve my claim. In this situation believing my unicorn doesn't exist would require evidence. I have ascribed this unicorn properties which you could not possibly verify. This is the case with God. If God were visible, it would be rational to say "I can't see him so I believe he doesn't exist" but since believers claim he is invisible, all we can say is "I have no way of testing your claim(s), so I choose not to believe them".
Say I told you a unicorn was in my house, sitting at the table. You enter and see nothing - the logical thing for you to do now is believe I'm lying, *positively* believe my Unicorn does not exist.
But say I then decide to say "ah, but this is a special unicorn! It's invisible, you cannot see it!". Things have changed now. The logical thing for you to do in this situation is simply disbelieve my claim. In this situation believing my unicorn doesn't exist would require evidence. I have ascribed this unicorn properties which you could not possibly verify. This is the case with God. If God were visible, it would be rational to say "I can't see him so I believe he doesn't exist" but since believers claim he is invisible, all we can say is "I have no way of testing your claim(s), so I choose not to believe them".
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #278,720
> Doesn't that take an act of faith to not believe just as it does to believe?
Why is that so bad? I do not believe that faith doesn't exist. Just the sky fairy.
Why is that so bad? I do not believe that faith doesn't exist. Just the sky fairy.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 22 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #278,743
@278,715 (C)
So what you're saying is that I could very easily set up a church of the invisible unicorn, and I would've face any concrete opposition? You may be on to something here...
So what you're saying is that I could very easily set up a church of the invisible unicorn, and I would've face any concrete opposition? You may be on to something here...
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #278,757
@previous (D)
If you gave this unicorn powers or characteristics beyond human verifiability, nobody could claim they weren't true without evidence, but be careful never to claim something about the unicorn that somebody might be able to check.
oh and btw: ponies > unicorns
If you gave this unicorn powers or characteristics beyond human verifiability, nobody could claim they weren't true without evidence, but be careful never to claim something about the unicorn that somebody might be able to check.
oh and btw: ponies > unicorns
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #278,764
@previous (C)
This is brilliant. I'll make it even less verifiable than Christianity. Nobody will be able to refute it!
Duh.
This is brilliant. I'll make it even less verifiable than Christianity. Nobody will be able to refute it!
Duh.