I wanted to put this question out there to see how strongly everyone feels on this subject. Being that most of us trust in scientific fact and reasoning, I was wondering if everyone is absolutely, undeniably, 100% sure that a god doesn't exist.  I personally take into account that there is no proof of any cosmic creator so therefore I am about 99.9999% sure that there is no god. However we all agree that science is an ever evolving field and I don't think that there will ever be any proof to support the existence of a supreme being, but I can't be 100% sure until there is concrete proof against one. I would like to know what all of your thoughts on this.  

Views: 18028

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think I agree, who cares just live and don't worry about the questions.
Well, not all questions! But, "does [insert deity or supernatural being] exist despite the lack of evidence," type questions certainly don't matter here. The only usefulness I see in asking a question like this is as an exercise for children, especially on an atheist social site. I find it odd that this post has garnered so much attention.

Hi Bryan,

I don't think it is the question that has garnered the attention but the answers.

@Drake

We begin with the belief that we exist; the challenge is simply to find scientific or philosophic certainty for that. 

If you want scientific evidence that anything exists, then that is easy. 

 

Scientific method according to the oxford dictionary:

consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses:

I've included direct links  to the Oxford dictionary for your personal use in case you don't understand any of the words in the sentence. 

 

exist: occur or be found, especially in a particular place or situation:

        have objective reality or being:

 

In regards to observation, you can open your eyes and look around you, currently you can seen a computer in front of you. Because you can see it, your are observing it. Not only that but when you start typing you can hear sounds from your key broad, You can feel the keyboard with your fingers, lick it and you will be able to taste the plastic it is made from. You can measure its dimensions. test how strong the plastic it is made from is, how heat resistant it is etc. And you can do this to any computer in the world, anywhere in the world, and anybody else can do it to. 

 

According to science method you can prove your computer exists, and other people can prove your computer exists also. You can do it today and tomorrow.

 

There is 100% scientific certanty that your computer exitsts. 

 

But

 

'philosophic certainty'? You can think anything you want in philosophy. It may be logical what you think and it may not be logical. What you and others may be considered to be logical may not be considered logical by others, this is the realm of philosophy.

 

Science can be used to prove hypothesis about things that exist via scientific method. But if it can not be observed, scientific method can not be used to prove anything about it. 

 

 

Leveni, the challenge is the fundamental certainty, not simple justification. Scientific evidence is predicated on the assumption that what we perceive via the senses actually exists, so it cannot be used to prove its own axioms. It's not a trivial issue that you can just skip past.

 

I would recommend that you read DesCartes' Meditations on First Philosophy as a succinct introduction (little more than an afternoon of reading) to this area of questioning. Your unfamiliarity with philosophy in general is fairly obvious from your blatant mis-characterization of its contents and casual disregard of its value, so try to read up a bit before you come swaggering into a discussion you don't understand next time.

Hi Drake,

If I have time I might read DesCartes.

 

In regards to staying out of this discussion: This is an open forum.

 

This is what you said.

We begin with the belief that we exist; the challenge is simply to find scientific or philosophic certainty for that.

YOU asked for scientific certainty. I gave you scientific certainty in accordance with scientific method.

Scientific evidence is predicated on the assumption that what we perceive via the senses actually exists, so it cannot be used to prove its own axioms.

If this is your opinion, then why ask for scientific certainty?

 

Stating that a particular method of proving existence is valid and then deny that very same method for proving existence is.................beyond my comprehension. 

 

 

 

 

It was the 'swaggering' that struck me as more of a problem, rather than the desire to contribute. You immediately poured out a pile of condescension without checking to make sure you actually read my statements accurately.

 

It is not an "opinion" to point out that an argument cannot prove its own axioms (in this case, scientific justification), it's a basic tenet of logic.

 

"Scientific certainty" in the original context referred to theoretical work, primarily in terms of mathematical frameworks (like M Theory). "Philosophic certainty" is distinguished as consisting primarily of logical frameworks instead. As mentioned in followup posts, these are necessarily a priori methods given the nature of the subject, so evidence gathering is not immediately relevant as an a posteriori method. Clearly, physical confirmation would be the proper followup once the theoretical work has been completed, but we're no where near that point yet.

It was the 'swaggering' that struck me as more of a problem, rather than the desire to contribute.
Sorry.
"Scientific certainty" in the original context referred to theoretical work, primarily in terms of mathematical frameworks (like M Theory).
Ok, as this is the case, point taken.
I am still following the thread. And may continue to butt in.
How can anyone know? You can't. I can, however, say that I have 100% certainty that the god concept that has been presented to us if the forms of our modern day religions does not exist. Knowing for a fact that 99% of the Bible was completely made up and has been proven untrue makes me conclude that the other 1% that we have no way of ever proving or disproving ( concepts of afterlife, heaven, hell, etc.) are nothing more than embellishments thrown on top of a good story, or at least the attempt at a good story.

If most of the Bible has been proven untrue, why would anyone in his right mind think for a moment that those parts of it we cannot check are true?  What is there that even hints at that possibility?

 

Imagine a Lord of the Rings fan visiting New Zealand in search of the Crack of Doom.  He is told that there is no Crack of Doom, there is no Mordor, there is no Sauron, there is no country called Rohan, no fortress called Helms Deep, no such beast as a balrog, no elves, no hobbits, no dwarves, no Nazgul, and no Ring of Power.  The fictional fan is distraught.  His fantasy world is crumbling.  He is sobbing.  After a while, he starts to get himself back under control.  He sits on a rock, drying his tears, his mind racing.  After a few minutes, he rises and strides purposefully toward the distant mountains, his reddened face the very picture of determination.  He knows what must be done.

 

"I've got to find Gandalf!" he says fiercely.  "And Frodo.  They'll know what to do!"


Hehe.

Nice parable about true believers.

Mind if I use some time?

I don't think anyone can be so precise as to determine that they are 99.9999% sure of something.  In that case, they would be lying not to admit they feel 100% sure.

 

I am 100% sure that no religion's deity characters exist.  Whether or not a conceptualized deity exists outside of religion, I can't honestly say.  I don't believe it is possible to believe or disbelieve, as it is a nonsensical concept.  How can you believe in something that is incomprehensible?  "Deity" doesn't exist in my mind.  I can't make sense of it and definitely can't disbelieve in it.

RSS

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service