Philosophical Vegan Forum

Nivesh wrote:

TheVeganAtheist wrote:

TheBiPolarAtheist wrote:If God were real, he/she would show himself to everyone at birth, He would state all his/her rules, and there would be no argument.

I don't think that would be necessarily so. A god could have a reason to not show himself to everyone at birth.

I am very interested: What would be the reason?

Or maybe that newborns aren't cognitively advanced enough yet to understand?

"At birth" would be too soon to make a difference.

i dont even know why i bothered putting this up.. obviously nobody has a clue.

TheBiPolarAtheist wrote:i dont even know why i bothered putting this up.. obviously nobody has a clue.

On what basis do you state that? People having different opinions than yours doesn't mean they're obviously clueless, that's called arrogance. If you think they're wrong, explain their logic fallacies/misinformation.

Nivesh wrote: I am very interested: What would be the reason?

Christians might say it does, or that you are with god before being born, but you don't remember it.

Or, that you are created in the womb, on Earth, and you are endowed with original sin from the seed of Adam, and that god can not show himself to you until you are baptized and freed from original sin (because God is perfect, and the perfect can not exist where there is sin).

Or a thousand other ad-hoc justifications. It's all completely fabricated, but it's largely internally consistent.


The reasons we know gods do not exist are more fundamental logical, internal, and empirical contradictions in their prescribed natures.

Omniscience vs. Physics (Relativity and causality- no time travel)
Omniscience vs. Logic (information/incompleteness)
Prescience vs. God's Will/Free Will
Free Will vs. Logic (it's complicated, depends on the definition)
Omnipotence vs. Logic
Omnibenevolence vs. God's Will
Validity of Moral dictate vs. Logic (Euthyphro)
Omnipresense vs. Physics (Relativity and causality again)
Creation vs. Logic (Acting without time)

Those, among a few others I may have missed, are why 'god' doesn't exist.

...Not because there are lingering questions regarding the nuances of soteriological rules and divine motivation, which are easily resolved by any number of possible answers (ass pull or not), and basically useless because it just lets the theist know that the critic did not RTFM (all of this stuff is basically answered in standard apologetics fare with borderline plausible made up stuff).

They're called Theodicies, and the're a fundamental of apologetics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy

Why is that the center of apologetics?
Because those are the only questions most people get up to asking.
Possibly the only questions most people really understand well enough to ask- although that might be an overly pessimistic view of humanity.
People don't naturally deal well with logic or science. They personify, and they deal intuitively in emotions- so the emotional questions, the ones of motivation, are the ones they ask most readily and with the least difficulty.

And thus, theodicy.

But that's not something an atheist can bring to bear against any serious apologist- apologists who do have far higher IQs than some might give them credit for.

brimstoneSalad wrote:

Nivesh wrote: I am very interested: What would be the reason?

Christians might say it does, or that you are with god before being born, but you don't remember it.

Or, that you are created in the womb, on Earth, and you are endowed with original sin from the seed of Adam, and that god can not show himself to you until you are baptized and freed from original sin (because God is perfect, and the perfect can not exist where there is sin).

Or a thousand other ad-hoc justifications. It's all completely fabricated, but it's largely internally consistent.


The reasons we know gods do not exist are more fundamental logical, internal, and empirical contradictions in their prescribed natures.

Omniscience vs. Physics (Relativity and causality- no time travel)
Omniscience vs. Logic (information/incompleteness)
Prescience vs. God's Will/Free Will
Free Will vs. Logic (it's complicated, depends on the definition)
Omnipotence vs. Logic
Omnibenevolence vs. God's Will
Validity of Moral dictate vs. Logic (Euthyphro)
Omnipresense vs. Physics (Relativity and causality again)
Creation vs. Logic (Acting without time)

Those, among a few others I may have missed, are why 'god' doesn't exist.

...Not because there are lingering questions regarding the nuances of soteriological rules and divine motivation, which are easily resolved by any number of possible answers (ass pull or not), and basically useless because it just lets the theist know that the critic did not RTFM (all of this stuff is basically answered in standard apologetics fare with borderline plausible made up stuff).

They're called Theodicies, and the're a fundamental of apologetics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy

Why is that the center of apologetics?
Because those are the only questions most people get up to asking.
Possibly the only questions most people really understand well enough to ask- although that might be an overly pessimistic view of humanity.
People don't naturally deal well with logic or science. They personify, and they deal intuitively in emotions- so the emotional questions, the ones of motivation, are the ones they ask most readily and with the least difficulty.

And thus, theodicy.

But that's not something an atheist can bring to bear against any serious apologist- apologists who do have far higher IQs than some might give them credit for.

In all honesty I wasn't aware of a "god" until the age of 5 when my grandmother explained to me that he was just there. I couldn't believe it for what it was though I just went on with it until I decided to speak out for myself.

dan1073 wrote: In all honesty I wasn't aware of a "god" until the age of 5 when my grandmother explained to me that he was just there. I couldn't believe it for what it was though I just went on with it until I decided to speak out for myself.

Totally, just saying that's what Christians think, so the argument probably falls on deaf ears.

Also, the claim that we know god deep down inside and just deny it is very hard to falsify- to Christians count that as a win.
They love asserting unfalsifiable stuff as absolute fact.

TheBiPolarAtheist wrote:If God were real, he/she would show himself to everyone at birth, He would state all his/her rules, and there would be no argument.

But as it is, Faith depends on your zip code when you are born, and the people you meet in life.

Believing one persons lie does not make that lie true. It only decreases the chances that people will take you seriously in the future!

There cannot be a valid rebuttal to this, but please feel free to spout your idiocy if you see fit.

see here's a guy that just doesn't care, he doesn't want to hear any opinions he just wants to rant and stand on a pedestal and think hes high and mighty, by saying ""There cannot be a valid rebuttal to this, but please feel free to spout your idiocy if you see fit"" there is no point in replying. This is the kind of atheist that gives other atheists a bad name.

an atheist I admire once said "A DEED DONE IS BETTER THAN A PRAYER SAID" (And I said AMEN to that) - i want to meet more atheists that are like this... ARE THERE NONE HERE?

revankatal wrote:an atheist I admire once said "A DEED DONE IS BETTER THAN A PRAYER SAID" (And I said AMEN to that) - i want to meet more atheists that are like this... ARE THERE NONE HERE?

Like what exactly? I think most—if not all—atheists agree with that proposition. Why would any atheist prefer a prayer over a deed? Things aren't going to change by merely praying, you really have to do something to make it happen. Not that all atheists show this in practice, but that's the case with humanity in general.

I was merely quoting someone... and yeah, that's humanity in general.

revankatal wrote: see here's a guy that just doesn't care, he doesn't want to hear any opinions he just wants to rant and stand on a pedestal and think hes high and mighty, by saying ""There cannot be a valid rebuttal to this, but please feel free to spout your idiocy if you see fit"" there is no point in replying. This is the kind of atheist that gives other atheists a bad name.

You're right. We mostly just feel embarrassed for him.

If he studies more, and spends more time in the real world, he'll learn better. In a few years, he'll probably be embarrassed he said that stuff too.

revankatal wrote: an atheist I admire once said "A DEED DONE IS BETTER THAN A PRAYER SAID" (And I said AMEN to that) - i want to meet more atheists that are like this... ARE THERE NONE HERE?

Well, most of us refuted his position. We're all pretty active on here- many of us are activists (out on the street, at animal shelters, trying to make the world a better place).

The "vegan" part before atheist means morality. Veganism is one of the strongest moral standards a secular person can uphold (much more stringent than the vast majority of religions).

I consider most religious people to be hedonists with an identity crisis- all they actually do is pleasure themselves, and then they pray a few superficial prayers and they think that makes them different and better than every body else.
Morality is about action. Nothing less.