The burden of proof is on believers to prove God exists (according to atheist philosphers)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
STT said:
What I am stressing is that one needs to prove that universe exists…
Click to expand...
i don’t see any need to prove that the universe exists. Give us an example of an experiment that would falsify the observation that the universe exists.
 
Tomdstone said:
i don’t see any need to prove that the universe exists. Give us an example of an experiment that would falsify the observation that the universe exists.
Click to expand...
You can simply doubt. You cannot prove that universe exist. You cannot provide any evidence that universe exist. All you have is simply experience. That is it.
 
STT said:
You cannot prove that universe exist.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by prove?
Here’s my proof: There is no experiment that could falsify that the universe exists. Therefore the universe does exist.
 
Tomdstone said:
What do you mean by prove?
Here’s my proof: There is no experiment that could falsify that the universe exists. Therefore the universe does exist.
Click to expand...
To be precise, an experiment proves that an experimenter exists but not the entire universe…
 
STT said:
You can simply doubt. You cannot prove that universe exist. You cannot provide any evidence that universe exist. All you have is simply experience. That is it.
Click to expand...
You cannot prove to anyone else that you are having experiences. You cannot provide any evidence to others that you are having experiences. Ergo, if you want to insist on a solipsistic view of reality and knowledge then you have to begin by proving your experiences – which I don’t directly access – do exist. Not for me they don’t, so you have to prove them to me.

Even if I grant you that all I have are experiences – and according to you that is sufficient for me to claim to know anything at all – then to be sufficient to know the universe exists all I have to do is experience it. I do experience the universe, therefore it exists. That is, according to your position, all I need.

Recall your words: “I agree that Devils exist. I experienced them.” So if you can use that argument to prove the existence of “Devils,” why can’t I use the same argument to prove the existence of the universe, or my self for that matter? “I agree that the universe exists. I experience it.”

Again, your inconsistency is astounding.

In fact, I can save myself the trouble of arguing the case by simply defining the universe as the sum total of all my experiences. Prove THAT isn’t what the universe is.
 
STT said:
Do beings, such as God, exist because we can imagine them? I am thinking about this question right now.
Click to expand...
They do not exist because we can imagine them, but we imagine them because they transcend sensory experience.

In the same way, some astronomers imagine the existence of other universes that are radically different from our own. Yet they have no sensory experience of them and cannot prove they exist. That does not mean they do not exist, just as not having a sensory experience of God does not prove God does not exist … though some atheists are content to draw that conclusion while at the same time they are content to imagine the existence of other universes because that fits the logic of their agenda.
 
Tomdstone said:
What do you mean by prove?
Here’s my proof: There is no experiment that could falsify that the universe exists. Therefore the universe does exist.
Click to expand...
All experiment are based on experience. We cannot prove that universe exist based on experience. Have you ever read about Descartes’s Devil?
 
Peter_Plato said:
You cannot prove to anyone else that you are having experiences. You cannot provide any evidence to others that you are having experiences. Ergo, if you want to insist on a solipsistic view of reality and knowledge then you have to begin by proving your experiences – which I don’t directly access – do exist. Not for me they don’t, so you have to prove them to me.
Click to expand...
Don’t you think that the proof of God should be reference independent? I mean the proof should be valid in solipsistic view as well other views. That is true because God can create a universe that there is mere experience within and there is no agent/experiencer at all nor any universe.
Peter_Plato said:
Even if I grant you that all I have are experiences – and according to you that is sufficient for me to claim to know anything at all – then to be sufficient to know the universe exists all I have to do is experience it. I do experience the universe, therefore it exists. That is, according to your position, all I need.
Click to expand...
This mean that you didn’t read about Descartes’s Demon.
Peter_Plato said:
Recall your words: “I agree that Devils exist. I experienced them.” So if you can use that argument to prove the existence of “Devils,” why can’t I use the same argument to prove the existence of the universe, or my self for that matter? “I agree that the universe exists. I experience it.”
Click to expand...
Again, I believe on many things when it comes to my daily life. I only believe that the proof of God should be reference independent as it is explained in the first comment.
Peter_Plato said:
Again, your inconsistency is astounding.

In fact, I can save myself the trouble of arguing the case by simply defining the universe as the sum total of all my experiences. Prove THAT isn’t what the universe is.
Click to expand...
Read about Descartes’s Demon.
 
STT said:
The only thing that I am certain is that experience exists.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a difficult place to be. We know about the world through our senses and intellect. While there are so many things that can go wrong, for the most part it all works. The universe may not conform to our understanding or perceptions, but we can be certain of its existence, as we are of our participation in it by virtue of our experience.
 
Aloysium said:
That sounds like a difficult place to be. We know about the world through our senses and intellect. While there are so many things that can go wrong, for the most part it all works. The universe may not conform to our understanding or perceptions, but we can be certain of its existence, as we are of our participation in it by virtue of our experience.
Click to expand...
How did you conclude that the experience of something means that something must exist?
 
STT said:
The only thing that I am certain is that experience exists.
Click to expand...
And you are certain that the devil exists, apparently, though it isn’t clear to me that you can move from your experience of the devil to the existence of the devil without undermining your whole thesis.

To be consistent, you can only claim that your experience of the devil is what you are certain of, not the existence of the devil. Otherwise, if the devil exists because you have experienced it, then why doesn’t the universe exist because you experience it? Or trees, deer, the Sun and people around you? Or your “self” for that matter, because you undeniably experience those?

As for Descarte’s Demon, why should I waste my time if you can only possibly be convinced that YOUR experience ALONE exists?

As far as I can tell, you are being completely arbitrary with regard to what you accept as “proven” by your direct experience and what you choose to deny as existing.

Your standard for “proof” of existing is entirely capricious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top