I can’t really say that I’m an atheist anymore

[wishIwasSalludon]

It’s clear that the conception of God as being this all loving being who wants a personal relationship with us(but for some reason refuses to reveal himself) is bullshit

But I think you can make a rational case for an Aristotelian view on God.

Not saying I’m convinced but I can easily see why others would be convinced on this view of God

I’d say I’m more agnostic now tbh, I think there’s maybe a 10-20% chance God is real


@Mainlander @imontheloose @SlayerJonas

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

0

 

[imontheloose]

I’ve wrote an 11-odd page document on the problem of evil. I find it to be the most damming dilemma for the theist. @SlayerJonas has read it; he himself concluded, as I did, that God’s existence is consequently improbable.

It’s impossible to be truly atheist in that definitive sense, but it merely means without God without its connotations.

I would say I am slightly more convinced than the tooth fairy, but not by much.

 

[SlayerJonas]

I’ve wrote an 11-odd page document on the problem of evil. I find it to be the most damming dilemma for the theist. @SlayerJonas has read it; he himself concluded, as I did, that God’s existence is consequently improbable.

It’s impossible to be truly atheist in that definitive sense, but it merely means without God without its connotations.

I would say I am slightly more convinced than the tooth fairy, but not by much.

Yeah it's very improbable but kind of possible, I think per definition we are still agnostic

Now that we know it's improbable, we can only further assess the probability by thinking of other arguments pro/contra theism

Also mirin utalitarian approach to whatever you just did (you know what I mean)

I'm not angry at you it's just mind-boggling when someone says "literally" to me because it implies obvious simplicity I haven't acknowledged

 

[134applesauce456]

If God is real I wish God would interact with us and save us from this hell

 

[imontheloose]

Yeah it's very improbable but kind of possible, I think per definition we are still agnostic

Now that we know it's improbable, we can only further assess the probability by thinking of other arguments pro/contra theism

Also mirin utalitarian approach to whatever you just did (you know what I mean)

I'm not angry at you it's just mind-boggling when someone says "literally" to me because it implies obvious simplicity I haven't acknowledged

Yeah, we can’t rule it out obviously so we have to grant some sort of leeway. Atheism wasn’t about straight up guaranteeing it as if it was measurable, it was just a confident belief of “I think God is improbable”. Agnosticism is an invoked ignorance card where it’s placed of “I don’t know”. You can extract this to probability but you’d then be agnostic to the tooth fairy and African pagan gods, so it’s usually given that agnostics are indifferent to either side; sitting on the fence.

When I speak, I mean my words in their literal, definitive sense; literally is an exaggerating adverb to announce something as literal, exact, precise. If people use it in a condescending way then it doesn’t mean I am. I don’t have an angry or mean bone in my body.

 

[lemonnz]

I used to be athiest too but now agnostic, but if there is a god it won’t be any of the abrahamic, mayan, greek, or hindu gods it will be like the universe itself or something incomprehensible to humansz

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

I would say I am slightly more convinced than the tooth fairy, but not by much.

I’m far less skeptical of an Aristotelian view on God than you for reason I’m about to explain

The thing about this is we exist in some sense(mind blowing revelation right) maybe we’re just the products of random reactions in a Boltzmann brain or maybe we are in some 14 yr olds gaming PC rn

If we think about it there are really only two options

Either we exist due to an infinite chain of contingent things


Or is explained by something necessary(we can derive the attributes of this necessary being by logical reason)

So if you say you’re slightly more convinced then the tooth fairy you have to explain why you’re more convinced of one compared to the other.

Which tbh I’m interested to hear, i don’t see how we could possibly know so definitely.

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

Yeah it's very improbable but kind of possible, I think per definition we are still agnostic

Now that we know it's improbable, we can only further assess the probability by thinking of other arguments pro/contra theism

Also mirin utalitarian approach to whatever you just did (you know what I mean)

I'm not angry at you it's just mind-boggling when someone says "literally" to me because it implies obvious simplicity I haven't acknowledged

I think both you and @imontheloose are vastly underestimating the possibility of God

For reasons I’ve explained above

 

[imontheloose]

I’m far less skeptical of an Aristotelian view on God than you for reason I’m about to explain

The thing about this is we exist in some sense(mind blowing revelation right) maybe we’re just the products of random reactions in a Boltzmann brain or maybe we are in some 14 yr olds gaming PC rn

If we think about it there are really only two options

Either we exist due to an infinite chain of contingent things


Or is explained by something necessary(we can derive the attributes of this necessary being by logical reason)

So if you say you’re slightly more convinced then the tooth fairy you have to explain why you’re more convinced of one compared to the other.

Which tbh I’m interested to hear, i don’t see how we could possibly know so definitely.

The Big Bang began time. At t=0, you cannot go further back to relay on a dependant. Even if this wasn’t the case, you can merely say energy explains it.

I’m not definitive in either the tooth fairy or God. My point is that I slightly believe in God more and it’s mostly because you can’t rule of sceptical theism due to how it somewhat self-defeats and doesn’t allow for proper discourse around the why.

The contingent argument is a super old argument and I am really not a fan of it. It is only used properly when you ignore physical reality.

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

At t=0, you cannot go further back to relay on a dependant.

This is a common rebuttal but I don’t find it convincing for 3 reasons


Reason 1:
Causality isn’t dependent on time. In the reference frame of a light beam everything happens simultaneously.

There is no Chronological order to events but there is a logical one

Another example would be that the wave function for all intents and purposes seems to collapse instantaneously

There is no chronological separation between these events but one of them logically does precede the other.

Reason 2:
We can make an inductive argument against this reason. Everything we’ve seen seemed to have a sufficient explanation for its existence why would the universe be any different?

It doesn’t disprove what you’re saying at all but it shows that it’s very unlikely. So I can’t rationally say it’s convincing just for this reason alone.

Reason 3:
If you accept a strong or weak version of the PSR then you have to accept that the Big Bang had a cause.

The only alternative is to reject the PSR entirely but that has problems(which we can discuss if needed)

 

[imontheloose]

This is a common rebuttal but I don’t find it convincing for 3 reasons


Reason 1:
Causality isn’t dependent on time. In the reference frame of a light beam everything happens simultaneously.

There is no Chronological order to events but there is a logical one

Another example would be that the wave function for all intents and purposes seems to collapse instantaneously

There is no chronological separation between these events but one of them logically does precede the other.

Reason 2:
We can make an inductive argument against this reason. Everything we’ve seen seemed to have a sufficient explanation for its existence why would the universe be any different?

It doesn’t disprove what you’re saying at all but it shows that it’s very unlikely. So I can’t rationally say it’s convincing just for this reason alone.

Reason 3:
If you accept a strong or weak version of the PSR then you have to accept that the Big Bang had a cause.

The only alternative is to reject the PSR entirely but that has problems(which we can discuss if needed)

I’m going to head to bed, but I will bookmark this to return to when I next log on. Goodnight!

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

I’m going to head to bed, but I will bookmark this to return to when I next log on. Goodnight!

Sweet dreams

 

[imontheloose]

Sweet dreams

Read me a story.

 

[JasGews69x]

Oh so you finally matured huh?

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

Oh so you finally matured huh?

all religions are still bullshit by the way

 

[JasGews69x]

all religions are still bullshit by the way

i guess you're on your journey...

 

[SlayerJonas]

Yeah, we can’t rule it out obviously so we have to grant some sort of leeway. Atheism wasn’t about straight up guaranteeing it as if it was measurable, it was just a confident belief of “I think God is improbable”. Agnosticism is an invoked ignorance card where it’s placed of “I don’t know”. You can extract this to probability but you’d then be agnostic to the tooth fairy and African pagan gods, so it’s usually given that agnostics are indifferent to either side; sitting on the fence.

When I speak, I mean my words in their literal, definitive sense; literally is an exaggerating adverb to announce something as literal, exact, precise. If people use it in a condescending way then it doesn’t mean I am. I don’t have an angry or mean bone in my body.

Cope harder nigga, I got my understanding of that term by listening to females using them and adapted because I'm a fan of evolution and shit

@InjectE or dnr

maybe we are in some 14 yr olds gaming PC rn

This would expand the context of this universe so much

I've never thought about a possible multiverse so what do you think about that (inb4 muh literally this doesn't make sense by @imontheloose, it's almost 4am)

 

[imontheloose]

@

@InjectE or dnr

Prime @InjectE was a specimen. Ugh! You missed out. Since you both refuse to read me a goodnight story, I shall recall the good ol’ days.

 

[SlayerJonas]

Prime @InjectE was a specimen. Ugh! You missed out. Since you both refuse to read me a goodnight story, I shall recall the good ol’ days.

Jfl he was being bullied during his final days if that makes you sleep well

 

[imontheloose]

Jfl he was being bullied during his final days if that makes you sleep well

Leave @InjectE alone. My lookism GOAT.

 

[SlayerJonas]

Leave @InjectE alone. My lookism GOAT.

I doubt he feels fulfilled this way. Chopping your dick off (exaggeration hopefully here) doesn't look like the most noble solution to life personally. He turned himself into a presumably weird-looking (fe)male, I doubt this brought him far.

 

[imontheloose]

I doubt he feels fulfilled this way. Chopping your dick off (exaggeration hopefully here) doesn't look like the most noble solution to life personally. He turned himself into a presumably weird-looking (fe)male, I doubt this brought him far.

How’s it going, Jonas, son? I don’t ask you anymore, even on corpus callosum.

 

[Debetro]

Well there is obviously a God and he is among us. He is 45 years old.

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

Well there is obviously a God and he is among us. He is 45 years old.

I know you’re talking about yourself

 

[Debetro]

I know you’re talking about yourself

Nah.