I was listening to a podcast a few weeks ago, and they were covering the apologetical argument known as Pre-supposational Apologetics. Its a clever argument, hard to refute if you're not already familiar with it, and this got me to thinking~ is there a way that we could use the fundamental premise for an argument for atheism? Pre-supposationalism 'pre-supposes' God's existence because without it, they say, logic couldn't exist. Well, we know that the argument is wrong, and it can be logically dismantled, but what if we could formulate an atheistic argument that presupposes no god in the same manner? Could we create a tactic as poignant and hard to refute but that is also right? Please, let me know what you think. I'll post in here as I have more time, sorry if this doesn't make sense, i'm on a lot of pain meds in hospital so i'm a bit off lol
Maybe you can give us the fuller exposition of how the argument usually goes? This argument just sounds like a blatant non-sequitor to me. My immediate response to someone trying to use this argument on me would just be that I think it is just hilarious that someone would try to use an illogical argument (non-sequitor) to try to logically prove anything. Perhaps an argument more towards what you are looking for might be that presupposing a god to provide a basis for logic could justify any kind of god one might want, including a malevolent one. There is no logical contradiction between saying that a god needs to introduce logic to a world to perform evil deeds as much as to perform good ones. But I don't like going down these roads too much anyway, they play into the theists hands too much.
This argument just sounds like a blatant non-sequitor to me.
Oh, it is, it is. It's a bald assertion without an actual syllogistic structure to back it up, from what little I've heard of it.
Under very few conditions is there a mathematical and true physical way for a God to exist, I was struck by an article about God showing us time in intervals of plank time in Scientific American. The problem I have isn't God or another dimension could be outside ours the problem I have is time and plank time are relative and to dissect it into more parts per second than there are stars seems to assume infinite wavelengths (or anything) effect quantum scales of our Universe. Any other discussion or argument of proving (logical or non-sequitor?) a God is based on superstition or philosophy. I will never be convinced be by logic or fear, they or anyone must prove mathematically and in the Standard model there is a God.
Proving the absence of something would be a neat trick. The best argument I've seen is a simple analogy.
Because the human mind can imagine something, doesn't make it likely. I don't waste my time proving that there are no hobgoblins, leprechauns, or flying dogs. The absence of any evidence supporting the existence of these creatures is enough.
Yep, the response can always be, "Well, have you looked EVERYWHERE?" LOL
My sister is a devote 7th Dayer, but when I ask her if God would really condemn someones soul FOREVER she says NO! Theist are not the problem and God is not the solution. The problem is Fairy Tales and Books like the Bible and the lunatics ignoring science for Dream land. More and more people lose faith because all you have to do is tell them God would never condemn someone forever and what if there is more than forever, because according to mathematics there is more than one infinity.
Try Old Testament(ing) Bible belt(ers) and Creationists with Isaiah 43:15 "I am the Lord, your holy one, the creator of Israel, your King" ( God talking ) he continues Isaiah 43:25 "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins" ( God saying he forgives humans their sins in Old Testament, so WHY do we have a NEW Testament? Not out of context, no excuses there was no need for a CHRIST or New Testament, they borrowed the whole son of God thing from other religions.
Oh, nice one Centurian! Liked it, liked it!