| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Ron Webb 
Senior Member
Male
atheist
Joined: 30 January 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2467
|
 Posted: 14 February 2008 at 6:18am |
 Andalus wrote:
Ron Webb wrote:
There is no water composed of carbon dioxide, by definition. It doesn't require evidence. |
by "definition" because it is based upon the "attributes", or essential elememts of water and carbon dioxide. It is a universal negative statement. By "definition" does not make not a universal negative statement. |
No, but it makes it a false analogy.  Obviously one can prove some negative statements, but the point here is that one cannot prove a statement that says something does not exist. Fortunately it is not necessary to prove that "carbon-dioxide water" does not exist, because we already know that it cannot exist, by definition. No one is suggesting that God cannot exist (i.e., it is possible to imagine such a Being), only that He does not.
| What good reason would someone necessarily believe that unicorns or any of the other rediculous aburdities must be true. |
Well, none really, except that lots of other people believe in them (or did at one time). What good reason would someone believe that God exists?
|
 |
Ron Webb
Senior Member
Male
atheist
Joined: 30 January 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2467
|
Posted: 14 February 2008 at 6:35am |
Israfil wrote:
Ron Webb sometimes Occam's Razor is not always plausible in all instances. Can you prove anti-matter exists physically? Can you prove multiple universes exist physically? Sure you can with scientific evidence using instruments but assuming you have no knowledge of this can you prove it? Sometimes explaining concepts the simplest explanation may not be the best answer. |
No, I can't prove those things myself but I know that there are people who can, and I know that in principle I could see the evidence if I really wanted to. Given that evidence, the existence of anti-matter is probably the simplest explanation (and I'm not so sure about multiple universes).
|
|
Ron Webb
Senior Member
Male
atheist
Joined: 30 January 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2467
|
Posted: 14 February 2008 at 6:42am |
minuteman wrote:
If the matter is understood then please elaborate and discuss the nature of the evidence that will satisfy the atheists. |
If God really wanted me to believe in Him, He could contrive any number of miraculous demonstrations of His existence. How about if He simply appeared right now, in my living room, and we had a nice chat?
Edited by Ron Webb
|
|
poga
Senior Member
Joined: 03 January 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 322
|
Posted: 14 February 2008 at 9:21am |
Diagoras wrote:
Seekshidayath and I have been having a lively discussion via PM about my atheism, and I decided to make a post for any others curious about my lack of belief. Well, to open I guess I should define atheism. There are two variations, strong and weak, but I personally am a weak atheist or an agnostic atheist as it is sometimes called. This constitutes a mere lack of belief in any God, basically I hold the same view towards Leprechauns, Unicorns, God, ghosts, or any claimed supernatural phenomena: I'll believe it when I see the evidence.
Anyway, I'm here so ask away.
|
as an atheist are you blind believer like rest of atheist and agnostic or do you believe in science and logic
please give answer in simple inglish
|
|
Andalus
Moderator Group
Joined: 12 October 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1187
|
Posted: 14 February 2008 at 6:45pm |
Ron Webb wrote:
Andalus wrote:
Ron Webb wrote:
There is no water composed of carbon dioxide, by definition. It doesn't require evidence. |
by "definition" because it is based upon the "attributes", or essential elememts of water and carbon dioxide. It is a universal negative statement. By "definition" does not make not a universal negative statement. |
No, but it makes it a false analogy. Obviously one can prove some negative statements, but the point here is that one cannot prove a statement that says something does not exist.
|
Not a false analogy. We are talking about arguing for a universal negative statement. The claim was that it could not be proven.
|
Fortunately it is not necessary to prove that "carbon-dioxide water" does not exist, because we already know that it cannot exist, by definition.
|
tangent. What was being discussued was the issue of a universal negative statement, and the idea of shirking all responsibility for having to make an argument for supporting a claim.
| No one is suggesting that God cannot exist (i.e., it is possible to imagine such a Being), only that He does not.
|
agreed. This is not the topic.
|
| What good reason would someone necessarily believe that unicorns or any of the other rediculous aburdities must be true. |
Well, none really, except that lots of other people believe in them (or did at one time). What good reason would someone believe that God exists?
|
I am quite ready to give my arguments. Not until the author of the thread provide their reasons why athiesm is necessarily true, which is the context of the thread.
|
|
A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/
|
|
Ron Webb
Senior Member
Male
atheist
Joined: 30 January 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2467
|
Posted: 14 February 2008 at 7:30pm |
Andalus wrote:
Not a false analogy. We are talking about arguing for a universal negative statement. The claim was that it could not be proven. |
As far as I can see, you're the only one talking about a "universal negative statement". What Diagoras has been trying to tell you is that it is generally impossible to prove that something does not exist, which is a somewhat narrower claim (and a well-known philosophical principle).
|
|
minuteman
Senior Member
Joined: 25 March 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1642
|
Posted: 15 February 2008 at 6:55am |
I am reminding only. There is no clear reply to my post dated 12 Feb. Please consider.
|
|
Andalus
Moderator Group
Joined: 12 October 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1187
|
Posted: 15 February 2008 at 6:22pm |
Ron Webb wrote:
Andalus wrote:
Not a false analogy. We are talking about arguing for a universal negative statement. The claim was that it could not be proven. |
As far as I can see, you're the only one talking about a "universal negative statement". What Diagoras has been trying to tell you is that it is generally impossible to prove that something does not exist, which is a somewhat narrower claim (and a well-known philosophical principle).
|
Incorrect. His claim was that he was in a position as a "weak" athiest such that he did not have to argue his belief because a universal negative statement could not be proven.
Complete rubbish.
|
|
A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/
|
|
Tweet
Ask an Atheist