How do you get the enhanced answers like this? I always only get the main Yes, No or other replies. — DoppyTheElv
One person out of over three thousand thought they had insufficient familiarity with the issue. Compare that to the same response in other questions in the survey. They know what they are talking about. Well over four fifths reject theism; Hence, much less than one fifth accept the arguments for God.Insufficiently familiar with the issue 1 / 3226 (0.0%)
God: theism or atheism?
Accept: theism 108 / 177 (61.0%)
Accept: atheism 22 / 177 (12.4%)
Lean toward: theism 13 / 177 (7.3%)
Lean toward: atheism 11 / 177 (6.2%)
Agnostic/undecided 8 / 177 (4.5%)
Reject both 5 / 177 (2.8%)
Accept another alternative 4 / 177 (2.3%)
Accept both 2 / 177 (1.1%)
Accept an intermediate view 1 / 177 (0.6%)
Skip 1 / 177 (0.6%)
Other 1 / 177 (0.6%)
There is no fact of the matter 1 / 177 (0.6%)
One central question relative to that existence becomes, how can the atheist make any objective statements about the non-existence of a God when he/she cannot even provide adequate explanations about the nature of their own existence? Or another philosophical way of asking that is, what means or method will provide for the ability to make factual statements about the existence or non-existence of those aforementioned things-in-themselves (?). — 3017amen
Unfortunately, most atheists fall into a similar extremist camp, much like the far-right fundamentalist's do. Meaning, it has the potential to become an antagonistic or resentful or 'I've got an axe to grind' exercise or mentality (even Einstein spoke to that). Nevertheless, as it relates to Philosophy, the irony is that over 75% of Philosophical domain's invoke God, like it or not, as an axiomatic standard by which things are judged. For example:
1. In Ethics: Christian ethics.
2. In Metaphysics: Descartes metaphysics
3. Epistemology: George Berkeley
4. Contemporary philosophy: Soren Kierkegaard
5. Logic: Kant's synthetic a priori knowledge
6. In the philosophy of Religion: God
7. Political philosophy: separation of church and state/In God we trust. — 3017amen
The Thomist formulations of these arguments are certainly bound up in outdated and problematic mechanics/(meta)-physics (and its not just Thomas' take on Aristotle, one of the Ways, iirc the Fourth, is bound up in some extremely bizarre neo-Platonism as well), which will obviously make the arguments difficult to accept, as formulated, for anyone not already inclined towards those frameworks. — Enai De A Lukal
Because they’re non-sequiturs. Do you know what that term means? It means they have nothing to do with the topic of conversation — Pfhorrest
180 Proof
1.4k
↪180 Proof I wonder how many atheists began their doubt with the Brothers teaching them the Five Ways? Perhaps it wasn't such a good idea.
— Banno
For most ex-Catholic atheists, it seems, doubt began in grade school or early high school 'bible study' without or, for some, years before reading The Quinque viæ. Good parochial schooling (at least in America) has been a fairly effective inoculation against the catechistic disease. E.g. Ciceronianus the White & @Frank Apisa can attest to that. Close study of Biblical history, as well as its scriptural contents, or Church history "wasn't such a good idea". Not only Aquinas, but Luther et al too, share a lot of the blame or praise. — 180 Proof
Ciceronianus the White
1.1k
↪180 Proof
When believing in a doctrine comes to require not only an effort, but one that demands acceptance of unsubstantiated assumptions and the repeated performance of uninspiring ceremonies, it's hard to remain a believer. I'm just saying. — Ciceronianus the White
That couldn't be further from the truth. — 3017amen
If you have anything intelligent to say that's not a non sequitur vis-à-vis anything I've said, then now's the time to say it, 3017. Otherwise, move along; I've done you the courtesy of posting clear answers to a list of arbitrary questions, so make your tendentious point — 180 Proof
Perhaps you'd appreciate a more straightforward account of the God Concept. Robert Wright, science writer & philosopher, has written a book --- The Evolution of God --- examining how human ideas about spirits & gods have evolved over millennia. It's not presented as a philosophical argument, but as a historical and psychological account of evolving human moral imagination.The reason why I ask is because I cannot differentiate bad philosophy from good philosophy. — DoppyTheElv
My point is the arguments for God's existence do not have the power to convince anyone God exists - only Theists accept them. Why bother? — Relativist
Ciceronianus the White
1.1k
↪Frank Apisa
I made my bones, so to speak, in a Church where the mass was said in Latin. I was a wine-pouring, patin-holding participant in the great Latin rite, and chanted away in that language with the best of them. I refer to the pallid, monotonous, grotesquely banal ceremony and liturgy which replaced it. — Ciceronianus the White
Banno
8.6k
↪Ciceronianus the White ↪180 Proof ↪Frank Apisa
Perhaps we might all agree on the excellence of the philosophical contemplations of the apostates of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church? — Banno
I don't thing there are any good arguments for God's non-existence. I also don't think beliefs are formed that way. Atheists like me got there by questioning our basis for believing in God, and finding it lacking.The question could be reversed: Arguments for God's [non] existence do not have the power to convince anyone God [does not] exist - only [A]theists accept them. Why bother? — EnPassant
Sure, but that makes the arguments pretty pointless. I guess they make theists feel better about themselves - but that's pretty superficial.While people strive for objective truth in philosophy, philosophical arguments can be subjectively interpreted. — EnPassant
Sweet bleeding Jesus! I'm not the only one. :sweat:↪180 Proof ↪Frank Apisa ↪Banno
Holy Mother Church gave me a great deal. A love of reading, learning, tradition; a fascination with the Roman Empire, of which it is a kind of ghost; an interest in the ancient pagan religions and philosophers it borrowed from so freely. So, I'm not ungrateful, but haven't been a son for many years. — Ciceronianus the White
:rofl: :pray:↪Ciceronianus the White Ah, you missed the sore arse and lifelong psychological damage. Good. — Banno
I don't thing there are any good arguments for God's non-existence. I also don't think beliefs are formed that way. Atheists like me got there by questioning our basis for believing in God, and finding it lacking. — Relativist
...neither of us would feel comfortable with eating meat on Good Friday. — Frank Apisa
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.