Atheists, Agnostics, and Theists Have It All Wrong.

I'd like to explain why it's illogical to hold any view that claims to believe or not believe in "God"


Firstly, to believe or not believe in something you must first define what that something is.

What are people referring to when they say "I don't believe in God."? If you hold the view that "God" is a supernatural entity, I posit that it is impossible to claim belief or disbelief.

Something that is supernatural must be able to defy all natural laws and exist outside of the physical realm of reality. You cannot believe or not believe in something like this, because it is intangible and could never be measured or quantified scientifically.

What would you classify as "God"? If a Giant Hand came down and shot lighting down to earth from its fingertips, would it be "God"? If you call God supernatural then no, it cannot be.

You cannot belief or disbelieve in anything supernatural because the concept itself is not rational or definable. If it cannot exist within our reality then it cannot be conceptualized and any attempt at conceptualizing it will fail.

The position I hold is called Theological Noncognitivism or Ignosticism.

For a more in depth look at noncognitivism, look here.

 

This goes for anything "supernatural" as well. Anything that cannot be observable realm of reality is impossible to conceptualize.

 

Like your money's value?

Your freindships?

Your Love?

Your Hope?

Your desires?

Your purpose?

Like Dark matter? Like Black holes (you cannot directly observe one)?

And what about all those parts of the universe that we have yet to discover? Are they not real?

 

The concept of god is a product of the minds of man, the concept of the supernatural is a product of man's mind. There is not inconceivable that can be applied to an idea that is a product of man. Such ideas can and will be the topic of discussion. If the predictions made by these faiths contradict the observable world, then they will be the topic of debate and dismissal.

You cited all possible position is incorrect, belief, neutrality, and disbelief. If a topic is known to a person, there are no other possible position to be made.

Your position is nonsensical.

 

Everything before Dark matter are examples of abstractions of observable phenomena such as interpersonal relationships or the chemical reactions that make the feeling we know as "love." Hope and Purpose are simply thoughts produced by the human brain, neither are supernatural.

Dark Matter and Black holes are based on mathematical concepts and physical laws of the universe.


The supernatural cannot exist within physical realm we know as the universe and therefore can never be conceived or conceptualized.

This post is kind of incoherent, is english not your first language? (Not meant to be an attack, just asking for future reference.)

Anyway, let me give you this example from the link I posted:

 

So... don't define God as supernatural.

Define him as natural but unique.

 

So what is "God"?

 

The argument is quite coherent.

The concept of god is a product of the human mind. Such products are open to debate and discussion. If an issue is known to a person, they have three possible position, positive, neutral, or negative.

By if an "issue is known" I mean if a particular concept is known to a person. A person unaware of Santa Claus will have no opinion due to the absence of knowledge. After having been informed the person will by default fall into one of the categories. Either believing, remaining neutral, or disbelieving.

To say that is it illogical to take a position on an argument dealing with the products of the human mind is nonsensical. To use an argument like "well, god is supernatural, therefore inconceivable" is misplaced, if a concept cannot be imagined by man it is largely irrelevant to any discussion to be had.

 

Which one?

 

I consider myself a non-theist. If there is a being that can claim to be the God of the Bible or some other major world religion, I don't believe that it has any more rights than any other sentient being. Therefore, to me, it does not matter if there is a god or not. If there is one, I would not worship it.

 

So define my hopes for me. You should be able to observe them.

Our desires shift over time, so how do we define and observe them?

How do we know what the personalities of our children are going to be?

Define my freindships, and tell me which ones are based on mutual benefot and which ones are based on genuine affection? Explain to me why I love my wife - but not yours? It should be easy?

Explain to me how the vast majority of people know that stealing is wrong, but every theif does it anyway?

And how do you explain answered prayers? Documented miracles? What teh hell was Jesus doing? He was quiet observable, and I would hope that you are not one of those silly Jesus Mythers? What was Mohammed doing? Moses?

Or, you can talk about brown chairs as if that is relevant to a discussion about God.

 

Right, but at that point the word you call it wouldn't really matter. It would be an observable creature within the natural realm.

Right now, since God is generally described as to transcend all physical and natural laws, the concept is logically incoherent. It's incoherent in the same way the phrase "The sound is brown."

I see the question "Do you believe in God" the same as "Do you believe in ___?"

You can't answer yes or no because the phrase doesn't mean anything.

 

If you're interested in emotions and interpersonal relationships, maybe you should look into sociology and psychology? I'm not an expert in those fields so you might want to do some research into them.

As for prayers, they have no effect. If you have evidence of prayer working (nothing anecdotal) please provide it. What is a miracle? What do historical figures have to do with the logical coherence of the supernatural?

This is called allusion, it's similar to metaphor. I'll send you a link to the wiki so you can learn more about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allusion

 

Wow...that little ole' devil's been working on you over-time!

 

As many Gods across the ages have been considered.

Wouldn't that very incoherence be a good enough reason to disbelieve in it?

A statement of belief or unbelief is simply that. All of us by sheer necessity make decisions everyday based on incomplete information. All of us possess a set of filters, templates and tolerances that allows us to conclude when the information we have is "good enough" to make a decision.

And then we make it.

Remember... it's one thing to keep an open mind. It's another entirely to let your brains fall out on the floor.

Those are not equivalent questions. One is a question and one is not.

 

Then it isn't supernatural.

Wouldn't that very incoherence be a good enough reason to disbelieve in it?

Yes, they are the same question if the word "God" is unidentified.

Do you believe in God?

Do you believe in ___?

Do you believe in dfjsdfj;lasgpo?

The above all equate to: Do you believe in?


All of these phrases are logically incoherent and therefore cannot be answered. Unless the terms "god", "___", or "dfjsdfj;lasgpo" are defined, the phrases cannot be answered.

They aren't even questions because they have no coherent meaning.

 

I didn't say this, I can't edit my post so I'm just clarifying that I forgot to put this in quotes.

 

Morals can't be observed either. I guess we should stop talking about them. Or atoms, since they can't be observed either http://education.jlab.org/qa/history_03.html. And we didn't observe when the big bang occurred, so we probably should throw that out too.

 

Well, if you are going to describe God, I would begin by examining what the Bible says about him.

It says he created this universe, and we can see in the Big Bang a fuel source (pure energy) and ... something that just set it off for no apparent reason.

Where did it come from?

No one eliminates possibilities for this simply because the reason is currently unknown.

What is truth is that SOMETHING did that. Atheists have no better claim that theists ... but we get miracles and a relationship with a wise and loving God.

You tell me who comes out ahead in that equation?

 

The phrase does have meaning, "do you believe in manmade god x?"

It is a meaningful question, a question inquiring as to whether you subscribe to a particular doctrine or reject such doctrines.

 

Morals are abstractions of thought that are projections of our brain. described Supernatural cannot ever be observed within the natural realm and are therefore meaningless.

Atoms can be observed, observable does not mean we can see it with our visual sense. Observable means:

discernible: capable of being seen or noticed; "a discernible change in attitude"; "a clearly evident erasure in the manuscript"; "an observable change in behavior"

Ever heard of the large hadron collider? Just because we cannot see it with our visual sense, does not mean we can't detect it through other scientific means.

 

My definition of god is "mother nature," the laws of the universe, the big bang, order out of chaos etc. so my definition of god is quite observable and measurable. It permeates everything, it always was and it directs every power and energy in the universe. Seems pretty god-like to me.

When you start anthropomorphising god, then the definitions begin to fail. Many people need something supernatural on which to hang their hats and an all knowing, all loving, all this and that god fills the bill. People would prefer to have god be more like themselves than something abstract like order out of chaos. I don't think there is anything wrong with that at all. It serves a valuable purpose for society and represents much more positive than negative. I'm all for it. I just prefer my definition because it doesn't require any belief.

 

Yes, but if the answer is unknown and you posit that you know the answer, you must provide evidence for that answer. It's called the burden of proof.

I'm not arguing for atheism, I'm saying that it's as irrational as theism.

What is "god"?

 

You're use of the word "god" is interchangeable with words "universe" and "physical realm"

This question is more aimed at people that think of "god" as supernatural.