UPSB v4
Serious Discussion / Formal proof regarding the existence of God
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:18:55
If anyone has knowledge of formal proofs within logic and semantics, please look over the following proof and tell me if they see any flaws or fallacies within it. Assuming there are none, then it is clearly safe to assume that is is logically IMPOSSIBLE to make any absolute statement regarding the existence of God Sorry for the length of the .gif, I did this on my netbook so the screen capper tends to lag a bit EDIT: also sorry for the few pauses, my roomate came in to ask me something
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:21:25
too long just post the end result
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:29:36
@Zombo the png converter makes it smaller so it's hard to read, but here ya go
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:33:51
ok the problem with your proof is that it does not state all the base assumptions. if you're gonna work with the assumption that God is all-powerful, you should also work with the assumption that God is good. if God is good, then you need to argue why would God make a world where no proof of him exist and what way is that "good".+
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:35:35
@Zombo: what does it matter if he's "good"? all that matters is he could do it, regardless of his benevolence or whatever. the only relevant facts are he exists, and he can do whatever he wants. after that his motivations don't mean shit
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:37:11
you can't proof God's existence, its a belief, more like blind faith. If no-one feared God or believed in him, don't you think the world would be a fucked up place?
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:37:36
Zombo wrote: ok the problem with your proof is that it does not state all the base assumptions. if you're gonna work with the assumption that God is all-powerful, you should also work with the assumption that God is good. if God is good, then you need to argue why would God make a world where no proof of him exist and what way is that "good".+
Even if the assumption is made god is good, it doesn't mean he is good to his creation. If you built a house of cards and knocked it over yourself that wouldn't make you evil. If god made an entire universe for whatever reason, whatever action he takes towards it doesn't indicate if he is good or evil, just how he gets his amusement. -
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:38:38
@Zombo again: secondly, if you really want motivation, it's in the concept of "faith." Faith is meaningless if there's proof or disproof of god, so he'd create the universe wihtout that proof so that people have "faith"
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:42:43
i feel like it undermines your argument if theres nothing to direct god's "all-powerfulness" say I used the same argument 1) God exists 2) God is all-powerful 3) God can create a world where no proof of killing others/rape/corruption/etc. as being morally wrong exist therefore if God exists, any proof that killing others is morally wrong are invalid because God can hide them. Once you start with 1 and 2, everything lose meaning and you can't prove anything at all.
-
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:48:52
Zombo wrote: i feel like it undermines your argument if theres nothing to direct god's "all-powerfulness" say I used the same argument 1) God exists 2) God is all-powerful 3) God can create a world where no proof of killing others/rape/corruption/etc. as being morally wrong exist therefore if God exists, any proof that killing others is morally wrong are invalid because God can hide them. Once you start with 1 and 2, everything lose meaning and you can't prove anything at all.
I thought that was what strat was trying to proof? that you can't prove god's exsitence -
Date: Mon, Jan 10 2011 23:58:58
@Zombo : I don't see the relevance of that, but you can't say from that "you can't prove that killing is immoral" but sure you could technically say "If god exists and he decided to make proof of killing being moral impossible, then under those circumstances that prove is without meaning" but such a statement wouldn't make much sense The point is that within christianity it's very clear that god requires faith, which is meaningless with proof, so following that line of thought I made this proof, which although is kind of tautologistic, it completely stands and doesn't have flaws or fallacies (as far as I can tell)
-
Date: Tue, Jan 11 2011 00:56:36
if you work only with the assumption that God is all-powerful, not that God uses that power for good, then nothing can be proved. thus ppl who don't like the fact they can't prove anything would not be able to accept the base assumption that either God exists or God is all-powerful. in order to convince those ppl while keeping those two assumptions, you also need the extra assumption "God is good". also your proof assumes God is all-powerful, it's not unanimous. some say God is only a guide for mankind. try to create a proof where you don't need that assumption. aksi in theory you can reduce your proof to just assumption #3, you don't need God to be all-powerful, you just need enough.
-
Date: Tue, Jan 11 2011 01:01:47
it's aliens i tells ya!!
-
Date: Tue, Jan 11 2011 01:50:52
@Zombo : I'm completely neutral on religion, I'm not trying to make a point either way, and hell I'm not even saying everything in the proof is true My only point is that IF in fact a god exists, and IF he decided to make his existence non-provable, then by a simple logical expansion there's no way to disprove him. So regardless of anything else, it's impossible to prove beyond any doubt that God doesn't exist I guess the only point is to realize that it's fucking stupid to try to say you have incontrovertible evidence that God does/doesn't exist, because if he does then he sure as hell is smarter than you so whatever you think you've proven is pointless
-
Date: Wed, Jan 12 2011 05:51:49
I don't understand what kind of real-world implications this proof could have. You have proven that a god's existence cannot be absolutely proven to be true or false based upon only three factors. Certainly, those three factors aren't the same in every belief system. If somehow we could find which belief system was true, and make a proof similar to this one based on that belief system's main tenants, then the proof would be of some use. But that is almost certainly impossible, so it doesn't. (For the real world, anyway; hypothetically, it works great as a proof of pure agnosticism.)
-
Date: Wed, Jan 12 2011 06:05:33
strat1227 wrote: I guess the only point is to realize that it's fucking stupid to try to say you have incontrovertible evidence that God does/doesn't exist, because if he does then he sure as hell is smarter than you so whatever you think you've proven is pointless
if you have incontrovertible evidence that God would never use its power to hide its own existence, then the proof still stands. -
Date: Wed, Jan 12 2011 07:14:00
haha well still technically no, because again if he did want to hide his own existence he could still make that proof it'd be like an impossibly good criminal covering his trails, he can make it look like he was never there, and even look like there's PROOF he was never there, but that doesn't mean the proof is actually real, we just think it is but yeah i agree that the proof doesn't really SAY anything except that it's impossible to say anything
-
Date: Wed, Jan 12 2011 07:17:13
it's the same thing as solipsism, it's nice to know but ppl don't really explore it any further because there's not much that can be done once you're set in that mindset. and that's boring.
-
Date: Wed, Jan 12 2011 23:11:18
Zombo wrote: it's the same thing as solipsism, it's nice to know but ppl don't really explore it any further because there's not much that can be done once you're set in that mindset. and that's boring.
@ Zombo no, that mind set can let you exam all kinds of possibilities, even contradictory ones, the merit of that mind set is that it lets you not got stuck in any mind set, and thats exciting if you want to get stuck from it, then thats your own descion. -
Date: Thu, Feb 24 2011 19:53:35
The main question is: How did people start having faith in god? If god existed and created man and the universe, why would he not want to show any trace of him creating the universe? also, if there was a god, could god control the universe and humans because he made it?
-
Date: Fri, Feb 25 2011 13:28:03
AAAAARGH!!!!! STOP CONFUSING ME!!!!!!!!!
-
Date: Fri, Feb 25 2011 22:56:44
Zombo wrote: ok the problem with your proof is that it does not state all the base assumptions. if you're gonna work with the assumption that God is all-powerful, you should also work with the assumption that God is good.+
That seems to just complicate the issue because it raises the age old argument of whether God is good because anything he does is by definition "good," or God is following some external definition of "good," the acceptance of either leading to a paradox. @Strat. The entire proof seemed to me just plain silly. If you're going to attempt an argument for the irrelevance of proofs with respect to God, then you've simply made God a concept outside the realm of human speculation, as the only real tool we have when postulating a God is logic. Also, it seems a common mistake (at least to me) to associate the sort of "creation" that humans have experience with, that being the rearrangement of existing matter into new and different combinations, with the creation of matter or energy out of nothing at all. Assuming that an "omnipotent" God (whatever that means) is capable of such a thing is meaningless as our current understanding of "omnipotent" only exists within the universe in which our intuition developed. If God is able to accomplish anything, does that mean he is able to do anything within the realm of an existing framework, or does that mean that there exists no framework in which God is fixed? This is a question which demands an answer before claiming God is able to "create" a universe at all, much less have human characteristics such as motivation or preferring certain outcomes over others. These questions seem to me unanswerable, making the proof still more silly. So I'd say your premises are riddled with errors. But hurr durr, I dun knowz it. -
Date: Sat, Feb 26 2011 01:12:58Does god have the power to remove evil? No? Then he is not omnipotent Does god have the will to remove evil? No? Then god is evil. So then, why is there evil in this world? and why do we consider him right
-
Date: Sat, Feb 26 2011 02:57:35
Assume god is an all powerful being with an immortal life span, and that he crafted us in his image. Being immortal must get pretty boring at times, when humans are bored we might want to make up stories, these stories might subject the characters to evil, but does that make the writer evil? If god created us then any "evil" you see isn't so much evil, but just an imaginary evil to god, like a tragedy to a hero in a book. Are you sure on there being evil in this world from the perspective of god? maybe thats what makes it exciting for him. You can just come up with arguments from any side, doesn't mean they are right or not. Talking about these things is intellectual masturbation at its finest
-
Date: Sat, Feb 26 2011 03:08:04
Awesome wrote: Being immortal must get pretty boring
[color=green]>implying boredom is a trait of a perfect being[/color] -
Date: Mon, May 23 2011 06:48:38
Stare wrote:
here is a story ..i shorted it a bit. Its not really by Albert Einstein by the point it carries is still pretty releavent. Most of you probably dont have to read this (im well aware your just tryign to proove its impossible to proove that god does/does not exits) but for those who question evil in the world etc: ========================================================================================================== An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, the Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and..... Prof: So you believe in God? Student: Absolutely, sir. Prof: Is God good? Student: Sure. Prof: Is God all-powerful? Student: Yes. Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm? (Student is silent.) Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God good? Student: Yes. Prof: Is Satan good? Student: No Prof: Where does Satan come from? Student: From...God... Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world? Student: Yes. Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct? Student: Yes. Prof: So who created evil? (Student does not answer.) Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they? Student: Yes, sir. Prof: So, who created them? (Student has no answer.) Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't. Prof: Yet you still believe in Him? Student: Yes. Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Student: Nothing. I only have my faith. Prof: Yes, faith. And that is the problem science has. Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat? Prof: Yes. Student: And is there such a thing as cold? Prof: Yes. Student: No sir. There isn't. (The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.) Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have any thing called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it. (There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.) Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness? Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness? Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light.... But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it is called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you? Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man? Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed. Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how? Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it.. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey? Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do. Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir? (The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.) Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.) Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain? (The class breaks out into laughter.) Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelled it?.....No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir? Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son. Student: That is it, sir.. The link between man & god is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive. That young man was none other than ALBERT EINSTEIN....... (well this bit has been proven false, but yeah) =====================================================================================Does god have the power to remove evil? No? Then he is not omnipotent Does god have the will to remove evil? No? Then god is evil. So then, why is there evil in this world? and why do we consider him right -
Date: Fri, May 27 2011 15:58:49
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ-kvw1fYXs [video=youtube;QQ-kvw1fYXs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ-kvw1fYXs[/video] [video=youtube;6qtjI8eGtvM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qtjI8eGtvM[/video]
-
Date: Mon, Jul 9 2012 18:12:59
neoknux_009 wrote: here is a story ..i shorted it a bit. Its not really by Albert Einstein by the point it carries is still pretty releavent. Most of you probably dont have to read this (im well aware your just tryign to proove its impossible to proove that god does/does not exits) but for those who question evil in the world etc: ================================================== ================================================== ====== An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, the Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and..... Prof: So you believe in God? Student: Absolutely, sir. Prof: Is God good? Student: Sure. Prof: Is God all-powerful? Student: Yes. Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm? (Student is silent.) Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God good? Student: Yes. Prof: Is Satan good? Student: No Prof: Where does Satan come from? Student: From...God... Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world? Student: Yes. Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct? Student: Yes. Prof: So who created evil? (Student does not answer.) Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they? Student: Yes, sir. Prof: So, who created them? (Student has no answer.) Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't. Prof: Yet you still believe in Him? Student: Yes. Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Student: Nothing. I only have my faith. Prof: Yes, faith. And that is the problem science has. Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat? Prof: Yes. Student: And is there such a thing as cold? Prof: Yes. Student: No sir. There isn't. (The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.) Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have any thing called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it. (There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.) Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness? Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness? Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light.... But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it is called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you? Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man? Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed. Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how? Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it.. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey? Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do. Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir? (The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.) Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.) Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain? (The class breaks out into laughter.) Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelled it?.....No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir? Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son. Student: That is it, sir.. The link between man & god is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive. That young man was none other than ALBERT EINSTEIN....... (well this bit has been proven false, but yeah) ================================================== ===================================
Wow interesting read. In the end a lot of things plays on faith. But for me, I can only understand something that has been looked into, researched and proven. So if one day, somehow God has been proven to exist (which if happens, will probably be way past my lifetime), then I shall believe in it; however, for now, I'll stick to being an atheist. --------------------------------------- Many people have argued that God is all powerful, but has anyone considered the omnipotent paradox? If God is all powerful, then he could create the world's heaviest rock. But if it is so heavy that even God itself can't lift it up then he is not all powerful, so if he can't create the world's heaviest rock then he is not omnipotent. --------------------------------------- I recently watched this: [video=youtube;WQhd05ZVYWg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQhd05ZVYWg[/video] Which furthered my understanding to the creation of the universe without God. The last 20 minutes of the documentary is crucial to the understanding of it, and I'm not going to explain it as the video is provided. But then, reading the comments, a counter argument: "What they said at the end is that there is no "before" the creation of the universe because there was no time and no space. Then they say that there is no time for god to create the universe within. The definition of god is the creator of the universe and everything else, then wouldn't he have created time and space? If so then He is independent of time and space and they do not affect Him. This implies that he doesn't need time nor he needs space to create the universe within." Which is also very true. But then again, this leads to how I believe in things, I only believe in something if it has been proven or is scientific. What the comment states is based on logical thinking and cannot be proved. -
Date: Mon, Jul 9 2012 18:48:25
god cannot be all-powerful and good at the same time i think the best way for religious theories to fit in is to compromise that god is not all-powerful in the sense that he's not omniscient (cannot predict the future) and also has no control on existing beings. that way you can justify the existence of satan.
-
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2012 01:14:33
Wouldn't this fit better in the Philosophy sub-forum ?
-
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2012 05:17:51
Alex wrote: Wouldn't this fit better in the Philosophy sub-forum ?
that's for PS philosophy ... -
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2012 16:34:49
strat1227 wrote: that's for PS philosophy ...
It would be cool to have a Philosophy section in the Off-Topic section too, but I think serious discussion is good enough. -
Date: Thu, Jul 19 2012 22:32:32
Was just reading through the rules of Serious Discussion. Now, strat, you are the mod here and you know the rules better than I do, but one of the rules says that religious discussions are not permitted on this section.
-
Date: Thu, Jul 19 2012 23:02:02
the existence or non-existence of a god doesn't necessitate a religion
-
Date: Thu, Jul 19 2012 23:49:18
strat1227 wrote: the existence or non-existence of a god doesn't necessitate a religion
Ehhhhhh. -
Date: Mon, Jul 30 2012 17:08:56
It is almost impossible to believe in god with a logical mind. Faith, hope, and any of type are all things that mean believing without any proof. Therefore there is no proof of god. But no proof doesn't mean there isn't one.
-
Date: Tue, Aug 7 2012 21:25:27
MickChickenn wrote: Ehhhhhh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism -
Date: Wed, Aug 8 2012 03:43:33
XYZaki wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
I like this idea. Sounds more logical than most standard religous beliefs, especially when a God is involved.\\ EDIT: I just remembered this. It basically sums up this whole thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist%27s_Wager Pick one. -
Date: Sun, Aug 12 2012 07:09:52
juggalo666666 wrote: Therefore there is no proof of god. But no proof doesn't mean there isn't one.
I agree. I believe that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Although it presents a very huge improbability. And that improbability is what we have evidence for. -
Date: Mon, Aug 13 2012 17:30:11
Rapid wrote: I agree. I believe that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Although it presents a very huge improbability. And that improbability is what we have evidence for.
What evidence do we have for this "improbability"? -
Date: Wed, Aug 15 2012 11:54:19
Supergirl wrote: What evidence do we have for this "improbability"?
Heavy evidence of evolution, big bang and other stuff that should not be said in this thread for it is connected to religion directly.