Anonymous at Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:43:15 UTC No. 16438869

>>16438858
>logically dismantled
this is /sci/. get your shit off to /his/ or something. there is no such thing as "logical dismantling" when fucking platonism still has adherents, it's simply not how philosophy works. only in science where hard and fast empirical rules and testing do you "debunk" things. philosophy in general has no such rule outside of not being contradictory

Anonymous at Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:57:22 UTC No. 16438890

Why are there atheists if atheism is logically dismantled? I mean, whenever some mathematical conjecture is logically dismantled, nobody believes in it anymore because that would be absurd. It would be like denying the Pythagorean theorem.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 00:42:18 UTC No. 16438951

>>16438858
Depends on what you consider atheism. Depends on what the goals of "atheism" are if you're appealing to consequences.

raphael at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 01:35:49 UTC No. 16439090

>>16438858
cosmic skeptic is just dumb

the likely truth is deism

>t. atheist jesus

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 01:39:15 UTC No. 16439101

>>16438890
why are there flat earthers if there's a picture of the earth

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 01:40:45 UTC No. 16439106

>>16438858
Yes, particularly if atheist arguments are structured as formal logic arguments.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 01:41:05 UTC No. 16439107

>>16439101
Because they're trolls

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 01:48:38 UTC No. 16439117

>>16439107
atheists or flat earthers

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 05:03:44 UTC No. 16439289

>>16438858
>gods not real because i dont like him
simple as

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 05:23:09 UTC No. 16439304

>>16438858
Do you fucks even understand what logic is? It's a process, that's it. Garbage in garbage out. The process itself doesn't magically grant you omniscience on unfalsifiable claims.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 06:59:43 UTC No. 16439365

>>16438858
At most you can argue deism which in practice is no different to atheism. Ancient books full of made up nonsense are still nonsense.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 07:03:04 UTC No. 16439366

>>16438890
What does it even mean to believe in something with no known properties. Ok, lets say I agree that god must exist, I have no idea what god is, as such I don't know how to believe in god.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 07:07:18 UTC No. 16439370

>>16438858
Atheism has to be proved. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
The fact that some people believe the universe either made itself or is eternal while also being dependent is wild.
look up the kalam cosmological argument.
>>16439365
>1 book bad, therefore all books bad
Christians and Roman emperors really ruined it for everyone else

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 07:47:39 UTC No. 16439392

>>16438858
Atheist speakers can't commit to moral relativism in debates because people will attack them for not adhering to their preferred set of morals
Atheist are right; rape is fine if you think it's fine, same for murder
At best you can say certain morals benefit society at large but this is just another opinion on what is moral
Christcucks can only cope

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 07:49:11 UTC No. 16439395

>>16439370
>The fact that some people believe the universe either made itself or is eternal while also being dependent is wild.
look up the kalam cosmological argument.
Prove the universe is real. You cant nigger

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 08:28:21 UTC No. 16439401

>>16439370
Christianity is easily the least absurd of the modern major religions, Islam is just Christianity with a bunch of schizo bullshit tacked on and Hinduism is from India

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 09:18:18 UTC No. 16439447

>>16439401
How so? Islam has many proofs of preservation, doesn't do any 3=1 type of trash, didn't bake in pagan customs, you're actually responsible for your actions and not those of your ancestors, God isn't human, etc.
In order I would put hinduism<christianity<judaism<islam
Actually argue for it or give up.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 09:47:28 UTC No. 16439471

Depends of the facts. If you accept certain priors, you can use logic. But if there is disagreement on these priors, then you cannot.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 11:51:43 UTC No. 16439584

>>16439366
Then there's something different in you that's not the case with 90% of the entire world's population because 90% of people believe in some god. I can't help you.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 11:55:26 UTC No. 16439585

>>16439584
Most people believe in some fictional character, a literal man in the sky. Not the kind of abstract god concept of deism.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 13:39:27 UTC No. 16439691

>>16439585
Most people don't believe in a man in the sky. that's just some subset of Christians.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 13:45:20 UTC No. 16439697

The stink of zombie Jews hangs over this thread. An odour that induces nausea in the sane and euphoria in the damned.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:13:50 UTC No. 16439894

>>16439585
I believe in a literal man in the sky, it's called an airplane pilot.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:34:28 UTC No. 16439932

>>16439289
Hey man, don't let something pesky like truth or humility get in the way of a good ego!

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:41:35 UTC No. 16439943

>>16439370
>>16438858
You can't prove or disprove the unknowable any more than you can know how heavy something is until you measure it. You can guess, sure- the fact the rock is huge means it's probably pretty damn heavy- but you can never KNOW if it's impossible to check.

That's what atheism is. It's the I-think-this-gigantic-rock-is-heavy club versus the I-think-the-rock-is-light club. Like you *could* prove that rock is light, given an absurd proof that is unlikely to be possible, but that doesn't mean it's likely you're right in the first place. You're as likely to disprove yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:44:01 UTC No. 16439949

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeVV_EDWHio

My divine wife

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:44:49 UTC No. 16439952

>>16439943
Its more likely that a fine tuned universe didn't pop into existence by itself than the opposite. Simple as. I don't know why we need to complicate things when our brains tell us something that is self evident.