I wanted to put this question out there to see how strongly everyone feels on this subject. Being that most of us trust in scientific fact and reasoning, I was wondering if everyone is absolutely, undeniably, 100% sure that a god doesn't exist.  I personally take into account that there is no proof of any cosmic creator so therefore I am about 99.9999% sure that there is no god. However we all agree that science is an ever evolving field and I don't think that there will ever be any proof to support the existence of a supreme being, but I can't be 100% sure until there is concrete proof against one. I would like to know what all of your thoughts on this.  

Views: 8770

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have to notice that people seem to be backing up their 99.9% positions by saying that we cannot predict the lottery, a coin toss, or other future outcome of an event of chance.

Duh.

But that does not, in any way, argue the point that we can be certain of some things based on the past and present without relying upon chance.

For example, when someone makes a self-contradictory assertion, we can dismiss it immediately. The example of the invisible pink unicorn springs to mind. One need not bother debating about unicorns to point out that an object cannot simultaneously possess the qualities of "pink" and "invisible." There is no need to consider the assertion further and no need to mete out even .00000onandon00001% of doubt.

The same is true of the assertion that there is an omnipotent, all loving, omniscient being active in the cosmos. Even a toothache proves otherwise, and having seen or experienced any suffering at all, one may be certain that such a creature does not exist.

CERTAIN, in this context, means known or proven to be true. Indisputable. 99.9% is not certainty. It is doubt. There are a lot of words for doubters. Atheist isn't one of them.
No. Like most of us here I'm at 99.999% sure but there is no absolute proof againts god or gods so no. Also anyone here who says they are 100% sure there is no god you are just as bad as the fundamentalist theists we all here have come the abhor.
Well that's an interesting accusation, Gary. In what way am I as bad as the fundamentalist theists you abhor? And how can you be sure?

Are you 100% certain that they are fundamentalist theists? Are you 100% certain that you abhor them? Are you 100% certain that you are who you think you are, let alone that, with all that doubt, you truly want to be on the internet publishing such statements?

Are you 100% sure that the internet is not located entirely in your left ventricle?

Have you considered that when you clicked the sign up box for this site asserting yourself to be a nontheist... you were .0001% lying?
@VINCE WATKINS:you can ask all this am I 100% blah blah blah. The question was are you 100% positive there is no god and unless you are privy to information that the rest of humanity isn't (like what fundamentalist theists think hence my accusation) you can't say your 100% positive. I am 99.999% positive there are no gods and I live my life under the assumption that there are no gods, not .0001 lying but .0001 unsure because I'm not an inter dimensional superbrain. oh and If you are 100% positive of something you better have some proof. so am I 100% sure the internet is not located entirely in my left ventricle? yea because if you cut my heart open all you are going to find is blood.
I have proof that the christian god does not exist.  That makes me 100% certain.  I am not a fundamentalist, just not someone who doles out trivial amounts of doubt to seem politically correct.
Gary, you seem to be insisting on the rather elementary error of not bothering to define the word "god."

What do you mean by those three letters? What coherent thought do they represent?

Because, unless you can define a word coherently, there is no point in arguing for doubt. As I pointed out, the traditional definitions of "God" are easily dismissed with mere logic and linguistic integrity.

It doesn't take and interdimensional superbrain to dismiss incoherent premises. I offered my proof in this thread if you'll take the time to read it.

But I suppose that "shadow of a doubt" is the fashionable way to go, eh?

However, by your own methodology, you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the contents of your left ventricle. Perhaps this rumored "trickster god" borrowed from another silly post is at work and only deludes you into thinking that there is blood in your left ventricle rather than the servers that run the internet. Even if you cut it open, you'll only see what the trickster god wants you to see. No doubt, this is the same trickster god that planted fossils so that scientists would think the world was more than 15 minutes old.
I will quit possibly screw this up, but I am going to at least attempt to clear up this "One cannot be 100% sure of anything" assertion. How is this;"Sure enuf there are a few assertions that one can be 100% sure of because they can be shown to be true by definition or that are structural true, however one can't be 100% sure of any assertion based on any observed bit of evidence, as it is always possible to be wrong on our evidence"?

So one can be 100% sure that if a is smaller than b, and b is smaller than c, then a is smaller than c. Because that is structurely true or true by definition.

I do tho largely concur that for us to be 100% sure there is no god makes us like theists in that we would then be guilty of holding assertions which one cannot back up w evidence. Sure our universe spears to behaves in a naturalist manner just as it would if there were no god. This does not tho, rule out some form of trickster god who made it appear that way. If our universe were made by a trickster god to appeared that it doesn't exist or if we were in some form of matrix it may well be entirely indistinguishable from an actual natural running world.

A god of this type in no way deserves or should expect to be worshiped but that is a totaly separate question from weather one could exist or not. For that matter I donot see that Jehova or Allah deserve to be worshiped either, if they are anywhere near as petty as their press releases describe them as.
thank you that was what I was alluding to.
So if one can back up their assertions that there is no god, it wouldn't be unreasonable to be 100% certain?  It also seems as though you are mistaking the distinction between knowledge and reality.  Knowledge can be wrong.  We can be wrong, but that doesn't mean we can't be 100% certain.  To take the path that it seems you are is to start delving into solipsism, and that slippery slope ends in the realization that nothing is true at all, even the concept of ourselves or reality.  While ultimately that may be true, it is a mental exorcise that ends up being completely irrelevant in discussion because it negates all points.

It amazes me how this thread seems to come to life every three to four months with a fresh new batch of people who wish to equivocate and mentally masturbate themselves over the existence of a god.

 

Well, I am one hundred percent sure that Zeus was a mass delusion for the Greeks. To be an atheist towards Zeus in 2011 isn't even a point of debate any longer. Zeus never existed.

 

But when I scan over some of the posts here, I just want to puke. I'm sorry, boys and girls, but if you are playing "we can't be one hundred percent sure," you are falling into the bullshit quagmire that is theism. You are trying to cover your asses in case, on your death bed, you suddenly get the inspiration to call out to the phony god of the christ-inanes, and in doing so, throw any words of atheism you ever spoke out the window.

 

What cowardice! What bullshit!

 

As much as I loathe the average christ-inane, at least they have the courage of their convictions when it comes to their surety of the existence of their banal straw god. Then I look at the words of some of the folks here, and all I can say is, "I'm glad I'm not such an easily bullshitted idiot."

 

For two millenia, if not longer, humanity has tried unsuccessfully to prove the existence of any deity, as well as things like ghosts, "close encounters of the third kind", and a lot of other errant nonsense we've created in our childish attempt to deny the cold reality of our mortality. In all that time, NOT ONE bit of proof has surfaced to prove ANYTHING but the over-activity of the average human imagination.

 

Not one bit...in over two thousand years. NOTHING! NADA! ZIP! ZILCH! And still, there are those who claim atheism, yet would just as easily throw that all away in favor of living the lie that is a theistic life.

 

How much more vacillating can you possibly be?

 

I am ONE HUNDRED PERCENT SURE THERE IS NO GOD! There has been no proof of "his" existence since time began. NONE!

 

Get with it, people. Either god is, or he isn't. There are NO DEGREES of existence or doubt. One is either pregnant, or not. One is either DEAD, or not. God either exists, or he does NOT!

 

Not that I think my words will quell many of the mental masturbators. I'm sure they will only serve to flush out the wimps who will go out of their way to convince me that my certainty of NO GOD is as bad as the certainty there is one.

 

Well, you can try, but you will fail. The only time I will believe in a god is when the fucker stands before me and PROVES that he is omnipotent. Until that time, I remain 100% SURE there is NO GOD!

I notice the pattern of 100% positive we can only be 99.99% certain as the position.

 

Hmm I just noticed I answered the topic question in a way that may not be obvious.

My response of positive is that of 100%.

 

 

You are quite right. I am 100% sure there is no Zeus, no Yahweh, no Allah. That is the problem with this % certainty question because it does not define which god we are talking about.

 

Am I 100% certain that the universe isn't really the Matrix controlled by a massive A.I.? I might be willing to say I am not certain intellectually but am emotionally certain that that is not the case. What about a deist god, some thinking entity that intentionally formed the universe and then lets it run on its merry way? Ok, I might allow some infinitesimally small level of doubt but I am pretty sure it also does not exist. What I can say with 100% certainty for both the latter cases and others like them is that there is no evidence compelling us to consider them, or even vaguely hinting at them, so there is no sensible reason to consider the propositions.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service