Rationality dictates that one must reject the existence of god. God represents a needless complication to our explanation of how the world works, unless a good reason is presented for believing in him, the rational thing to do is to disbelieve. It’s the same reason why you would reject the notion of santa clause, fairies, geocentricism, and the like.
Just out of curiosity, do you think all possible beliefs should be entitled free expression? What if a religion is for the massacring of Jews? Would that be okay?
What if you see a fairy? Are you permitted to believe in them then? Or must you reject it under the idea that it would needlessly complicate your explanation of how the world works?
You speak of rationality, but do nothing but beg the question. Obviously those who believe in in God do not buy the premise that there is not a good reason to believe in God. There are many good arguements for the existence of God. I only know of one good argument against the existence of God.
It’s a reference to the famous quote, “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus”. It has nothing to do with the state.
This question is actually answered in my previous post, but yes, good evidence changes things. What constitutes good evidence is another matter, but the question remains the same, what is the more complicated answer? If I saw a fairy, what requires more needless radical assumptions, that I should go see a doctor, or that magic is real, fairies possess it, and have used it, for some reason, to evade detection, except in some rare cases where they flitter around rural areas for no reason and also outside my window, that the entire field and every experiment done in aerodynamics is wrong, and all science up to this point has somehow missed seeing any of this.
That seems like a pretty complicated belief to me. Explaining the behavior of the world is pretty difficult if you think all that exists is your mind. You may be able to come up with something, but it’s far less complicated to say “it seems like there are things outside my mind because there are” And in fact, if you know anything about simulation, it would be far far more complicated for your mind to try to simulate the appearance of the outside reality existing then it would be just for it simply to exist.
Name a good argument for the existence of god.
No. This thread is about the billboard, not a defense of atheism. I have no doubt that anything I will call a good arguement, you will not. I have found most atheist not only do not accept any arguement for God, but like you, deny their validity.
Their validity is not a matter of opinion, they either are or they are not, and I have yet to meet a Christian who can justify their arguments for god.
… to your satisfaction. Thank you for making my point. This is why I do not argue with atheists.
Assuming I need to see a doctor for psychological problems is the most complicated explanation for ME. There’s pretty much nothing more complicating than psychological illness. Also, depending on how you define magic, fairies are not necessarily complicated. Also evading detection isn’t that hard … we discover new species every day. There are plenty of things that have avoided detection up until now. And why would aerodynamics be proven wrong?
Wow, so you think that “if X seems true, then it’s true?” So, why can’t you say: if it seems like God exists, then it reasonable to believe that God exists.
I would be even more skeptical of a fairy that I thought I saw with my own two eyes. I’d also be very skeptical if I started hearing voices.
That’s an excellent question. They say it not because they have proof, but because they have faith. Atheism is based not on proof, or even on evidence, but on faith. They do not know why there is something rather than nothing. They do not know why the universe exists, and exists in this particular form. They do not know why humans are the way they are. But they have faith that everything must have an explanation not involving God.
No, it does not have anything to do with my satisfaction or not. Reality is not a matter of personal opinion, either you have valid reasons or you do not.
Yes, it is. Yes, I do.
You are conflating different meanings of the word complex. We’re talking about complexity in terms of an idea’s coherence, not complexity in terms of how difficult it makes your life.
I cannot think of any definition of magic that is not complex by the standards we have laid out. You may be able to think of definitions of magic that are simple to say, but that is not the same as actually being simple. It may seem less complex to explain the movement of the stars by saying “it’s magic” but that explanation implies a number of radical assumptions, whereas heliocentric models do not.
We discover new species in terms of things like “an ant that is red with a black stripe instead of an ant that is black with a red stripe” in some remote difficult to get to jungle. A fairy appearing outside my window is a vastly different situation. But yes, I presented scenarios dealing with this very issue in my previous post, which you edited out of your quote, if you wish you can go back and read it again, I’m not going to repeat myself.
Fairy wings could not maintain flight for something of that size and weight. But yes, it does depend on exactly what was seen, you weren’t specific, and I dealt with that problem in my previous post.
No, but that is the least complicated explanation for why it seems like things outside your mind exist. And god doesn’t seem to be real. You conclude that he is real. But there are no phenomenon that make god seem real in the same sense that Hawaii seems real. In fact, believers have to come up with numerous long complex explanations, riddled with silly assumptions, even contradicting their own bible, for why god doesn’t appear real.
Because dreams behave differently then reality. Dreams lack a certain degree of granularity and continuity because it is so difficult for the mind to simulate reality. It is a unjustified assumption, much like the assumption that god exists, to declare that everything is a dream.
How is that simple? Things do happen without me knowing sometimes. Claiming that they don’t is incoherent.
Except you constantly ignore proof presented to you.
Are you telling me that you have definitive proof against the exsistance of God!
I’ve posted it already, you can read the conversation that has been going on if you wish.
Please… Pray tell, what could this be!
I can’t wait!