What do you think is the strongest argument for or against God's existance?
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I feel that the strongest argument for atheism is Occam's Razor.
Surely there is only one assumption for God's existence, namely that God exists. Whereby arguments against the existence of God make at least one assumption as well, if not more. Thereby making Ockham's razor in favour of God's existence, or at least neutral at the best.
That depends on which god. I would say there is more to it than simply assuming god's existence. You must also assume it is responsible for creation, it doesn't have a creator, and, if you are a Christian, that he loves you, etc. I do not think Occam's razor is a relevant argument in this case. I could, just as simply, assume the flying spaghetti monster created everything, and it be just as valid to the razor. You are right, it is completely neutral in its irrelevance.
In addition and on a more surreal note.
Would William of Ockham not have renounced his Franciscan robes after founding the principle if it indeed was a strong argument against the existence of God.
I feel that no argument really goes either way to proving that something does or does not exist. However, I feel strongly that this world is abhorrent and full of suffering to the extent that if there is something above us, it is not on our side. Tiny little apes should hold less inflated opinions of themselves, I feel. This world does not fit any God of any religion, bar the capricious Greek Gods, or maybe similar religions with similar distant, 'human-like' Gods. If there is something that did create this universe, it is at the very least uncaring, and perhaps even outright malicious. I mean come on, parasites that eat children's eyes? Wasps that inject animals with their young that slowly and carefully eat their way out, while keeping it 'fresh' for as long as possible? Dare I say humans?
I highly doubt that it's about sides, though I do agree that it's highly unlikely to care about us personally. In the grand scheme of things, I do believe we are serving a purpose, whether or not this purpose was predicted, planned, or even noticed in the overarching flow of Everything.
For that same reason, I doubt that there is anything malicious in the dis/order of things. The probability is low.
That is atrocious about the wasps though. I'm sure, had they any understanding of what they were doing, they would feel terrible... and do it anyway! Just like humans :) They might even go so far as to either make up lies about how children are fundamentally inferior, evil, or created by some Mysterious Giant Wasp to specially suit their needs, like a Theist.
I agree with Zara, there is no argument that can disprove a god or gods, because the arguments that are used to prove his existence are not demonstrable. There are many arguments against theism that sway me, i.e. suffering, original sin, faith, vicarious redemption, human sacrifice, the Skinner Experiments, hell, and likely many others.
Well, the question wasn't whether there is a singel argument that can "disprove" god(s), it was rather what do you think supports the most ether side.
The strongest argument against the existence of god is the simple lack of evidence for one, sure it doesn't mean there isn't one, but you can't say there is one if there is no evidence for one.
Well for me every argument of theists and atheists are all strong and contradicting to one another. In the end no one will win because both don't understand the perception of one another. The theists believe without seeing but by means of their intuition only while atheists don't believe in such idea.
The answer can be relative to what you consider god to be. If you ask for a god that watches over us and gives us lessons, then you are in for a rude awakening of contradictive and unexplainable events in life that make it hard to believe in such a god. But if you think of god as a force, one that created the universe but does not watch over us, then it does make more sense.
If you are to believe in a god, it is indeed much easier to believe in one that is a force. One that is way too powerful to even have thoughts the way we do.
There is no true argument to deny the existence of god, just as much as there is none to prove it. At least not for our primitive minds.
Something must have created all this. Nothing can come from nothing, there is always a maker. But we cant explain how it happened. And we want to believe that god watches over us and care for us, when in all probabilty this force that created everything isnt even aware of the existence of this little planet and the creatures inside it.
Occam's Razor is such a great principle.
to me the biggest argument against god existence is the lack of prove and evidence of its existance, noone has seen it...
When talking about the ultimate cause of things theists always say that God is the ultimate cause of things, yet when asked about what caused God? they always tell me that he's the Alpha and Omega, so it's unquestionable.. haha.. might as well say that it's the dumbest argument..
My favourite arguments against God are the ones that assume God exists, and yet can still show that worshiping him is unnecessary. I think that's a powerful tool. I've written an article that I think will be in the blogs section of this site at some point, where I explore the possibility that God is a liar. I've yet to hear any good reason as to why God, assuming he exists, isn't just a liar.