Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
TheVeganAtheist
Site Admin
Posts: 824
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 9:39 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: Canada

Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by TheVeganAtheist »

Ive nearly watched every debate I can get my hands on, and over the years you start to see many of the same arguments coming up.
You have:
  • Kalam cosmological argument
    moral argument
    design argument
    ontological argument
    argument from religious experience
    and even pascal's wager
Im sure I'm missing a few (let me know which).

Do you find any of these at all convincing? If you had to pick one, which would give you the most trouble?
I think the whole argument of objective morality can be a bit problematic, but not impossible to argue from a atheistic perspective.
Do you find the forum to be quiet and inactive?
- Do your part by engaging in new and old topics
- Don't wait for others to start NEW topics, post one yourself
- Invite family, friends or critics
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

TheVeganAtheist wrote: I think the whole argument of objective morality can be a bit problematic, but not impossible to argue from a atheistic perspective.
Objective morality is easy to argue; it's one of the theists weakest points, when you bring out Euthyphro. I deal in strict philosophy on those matters, rather than appealing to evolutionary sources (which is empirical, and hence not absolute as is logic- a theist tends to reject anything they can worm through, despite overwhelming probability).

I'm not very interested in the conversation: "Does god certainly exist, or is that not proven?"
Instead, I'm interested in the conversation: "Does god certainly not exist, or is that not proven?"

From my perspective, a theist only has to substantiate his or her views to the point of internal consistency- to the point that, from my perspective, I can not prove the version of god presented does not exist.

Obviously the burden of proof should belong to the theist to prove that a god does exist, but that's impossible for them to argue, and any theist who does argue that is usually an idiot, or employing some very dishonest tactics. The smarter theists know, at least, that it can not be proven, but maintain instead that it is a possibility- one that they just have faith is true- these are the people I'm interested in arguing with.

I don't concede that god DOES exist if I can't prove it doesn't (and neither would such a more honest theist expect me to). But if a theist presents a good argument for the plausibility of a version of god that does not violate logic as far as I can tell, and presents an internally consistent world view, then I'm happy enough to admit that I can not disprove that particular god (while still not positively believing it does exist), and leave with a friendly handshake and a "good debate".

The best arguments for god's plausibility involve simply defining "god" in such a way that makes it not demonstrably impossible (at least internally consistent)-- or even empirically likely that it exists in addition (that would be something).

These god concepts, however, tend to be very non-standard, and often classically heretical.
User avatar
Volenta
Master in Training
Posts: 696
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 5:13 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by Volenta »

The fine tuning argument is almost always coming up in a debate. But I think it's really an argument that appeals to ignorance, since nobody knows what the alternative possibilities are for live to have been evolved (within this universe as it is, with different constants in this universe, alternative universes, etc). So how does anyone know it's fine tuned?

I actually find the argument from morality one of the easiest one to refute. It's all based on the premise that morality is objective and absolute—without this, the argument is nothing. And I don't see any reason to think that morality is objective in the sense that theists argue. If it would be 'objective', I think it would be in the way Sam Harris is arguing in The Moral Landscape, where he's basing it on individual and collective wellbeing/states of minds/etc. Morality without consciousness makes no sense to my eyes. Don't see any reason to make God the author of morality. I just can't understand this argument is still used so much.

From the first moment I started to watch debates and discussions—while not calling myself an atheist back then, more agnostic—I've never found any argument from the theistic side compelling.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Volenta wrote:And I don't see any reason to think that morality is objective in the sense that theists argue. If it would be 'objective', I think it would be in the way Sam Harris is arguing in The Moral Landscape, where he's basing it on individual and collective wellbeing/states of minds/etc. Morality without consciousness makes no sense to my eyes.
Morality without sentience is like π without circles (or other related forms)

It's objective, but it only deals axiomatically with a certain category of things. Morality, like mathematics, deals with a relationship within the context of a particular system.

For humans, we tend presuppose the relevance of that particular category of things (sentience), and we can even forget that ever so important axiomatic context in the process and just imagine it's something related to all things- as if they have supposed that π is relevant to a one dimensional point, or a two dimensional ray.
That mistaken assumption leads them to work backwards, and determine, then, that all points and lines must also be circles, or if they aren't circles, that they were created by circles- or else π wouldn't be relevant to them, when they have presupposed that it was.

That's why theists mistake morality- they see non-sentient things as part of a sentient system.

If an action or inaction is not chosen by one sentient being, affecting another sentient being, then it has no moral nature- and as such, need not be directly related to sentience, or be created by sentience (such as natural disasters, or the universe itself).
User avatar
Free From Religion
Newbie
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 1:08 am

Re: Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by Free From Religion »

I have never heard a theistic argument that was clearly stated and which was difficult to rebut. I have however heard arguments so awkwardly worded and/or deeply confused to the point where a response would have to be very long and I wouldn't even bother. The problem isn't rebutting their arguments because that has been done many times. The problem is getting people to let go of this mental security blanket they have which keeps them from thinking critically about this issue.
"Remember that truth has nothing to fear from doubt. Truth withstands scrutiny. If anyone tries to convince you doubt is a sin while belief without evidence is a virtue... you can bet they are selling lies." -MystryBox
Hightower
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:28 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Theists Best Arguments for a god's existence?

Post by Hightower »

Simply put, I've watch a lot of debates from the best minds of both theist and atheist ideas and it's clear that theists provide no evidence and are inconsistent with their arguments, while atheists are consistent and provide evidence. The scientific method is clearly the best means by which to seek out what is true.
Post Reply