To learn, to challenge or for personal matters, it's all good.
Basic form of the argument: For all we know, the universe is infinite. There might even be infinite universes. However small the chance of a god existing in any given way, place or universe, the infinite possibilities make it practically certain that a god is out there somewhere. Answer by SmartLX: This one crops up … Continue reading “The Great Big Arguments #9: Infinity”
Sample argument: The proof that God exists is that without Him you couldn’t prove anything. You must borrow from the Christian worldview, and a God who makes universal, immaterial, unchanging laws possible, in order to prove anything. By what standard can you know anything without God? Answer by SmartLX: This is the Transcendental Argument for … Continue reading “The Great Big Arguments #1b: Presuppositional, SyeTenB Style”
Question from Zach: Hi all. I’ve recently come out about my atheism to my Catholic ( and extremely intolerant) family. Their biggest “proof” of god is the argument from contingency. Now I’ve read up on the atheist refutation of this argument but I found it extremely confusing, thus I cannot explain it to my parents. … Continue reading “The Great Big Arguments #8: Contingency”
“Only humans are aware of having a stake in the moral and ethical parameters within which we live our lives. That’s why we’ve worked so hard to shape them over thousands of years, using various forms of authority from self-contained logic to force to claims of divine backing to support one adjustment over another.”
“What if you’re wrong?”
“…false dilemma: either the authors took wild guesses and were correct multiple times purely by chance, or they were divinely inspired and therefore granted knowledge the rest of humanity didn’t have at the time.”
“…theists may claim that anything natural with any quality to it whatsoever must have been deliberately crafted with humanity in mind.”
“My aim is make this a reference for any subsequent “origin” questions.”
The Ontological Argument: “…the equivalent of trying to win a lawsuit on a technicality.”
The Transcendental Argument: “…the equivalent of winning at chess by knocking over all the pieces.”