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: 11603

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am 100% positive you can not prove it exists!

I am (100-(1/infinity)) % sure it does not exist!
I am 110% sure there is no biblical god as evidence contradicts it. As for some power or force, I can only be 98% sure I guess.
Forgot, I am about 50% certain some tribal leader named Yahweh or Jehovah existed and long after he did something for his tribe to give them. Some type id freedom or power, stories about him were attributed to the god Aten's mythology.
I definitely wasn't talking about the god of the bible or of any religion for that matter. I was trying to make the point that since most of us came to our realization through science, and science has never actually proven that a god doesn't exist, how can we completely rule out the possibility however minute that possibility might be?
Absolutely, undeniably, 100% sure? Maybe not that sure, but mighty close.
This is basically a Russell's Teapot quesiton.

The wikipedia discussion is pretty much what I would say, but I can't say it that well.

In addition, the questions presupposes that if there are gods, there is only one; and presupposes that we are all talking about the same one. I am as sure there is no Yawheh as I am there is no Thor, Zeus, Prometheus, Quetzalcoatl, or Ahura Mazdā. Or orbiting teapot.
"...since most of us came to our realization through science..." Might be interesting hear how everyone would respond to this. Science contributed to, but was not completely responsible for, my escape from religious indoctrination.
Good point. I was never indoctrinated so I was atheist long before science ever came into the picture. In addition, I remained an atheist because I have never come across any reason to change and never found any religious belief that made sense and didn't have followers who weren't complete hypocrites. Science had little, if anything to do with it.

Indeed, I was also raised without the religious/godly BS, and similarly, never saw any religion that made any sense at all. My family was very in tune with nature, gardening, farming, and the outdoors. I made my decision to go into the sciences later, at the age of 15.

I do meet many many atheists who make a whole bunch of erroneous scientific claims who pretend they're scientists though! :)

Since gods are "super-natural" I don't think scientists have the tools to study them...scientists can study religion, religious customs, religious beliefs, etc, etc, etc. God's existence is a philosophical question in my opinion and not the realm of scientific inquiry. I am 99.9999 % confident that there is no supernatural being that is watching over me, protecting me, punishing me, having strong fatherlike paternal feelings for me...etc etc. And Jesus as the son of God takes us to a whole other realm of illogical thinking....but I'm willing to say that there is a 1% chance that God is possible...but unlikely. If I were the gambling type, I'd trust myself with this bet of probability.
Since there is no supernatural, there are no gods.
Hi Scott,

I think that 99% is reasonable for a deist God but 99.9999% is reasonable for a theist God.

Given how much we don't know, certainty must contain some element of dogma. The 2 reigning paradigms of physics -- relativity and quantum mechanics -- are at loggerheads with each other. We have fundamental gaps in our understanding. Total certainty is far from reasonable.

The 2 greatest reservations I have holding me back from 100% certainty centers around (1) the origin of the universe and (2) the ineffable mystery of life.

I had held that (1) if the universe had a beginning, that would violate the fundamental laws of nature and open the door to a supernatural "source". But the latest scientific consensus asserts that the universe sprang naturally from nothing because the total energy of the universe equals zero (thanks to negative energy). Nature abhors a void and fills it with quantum fluctuations. If that's true, then I guess my reservation #1 has been removed.

Thus far, (2) abiogenesis is an unsubstantiated theory. We don't know how animate beings sprang from inanimate matter. The fact that there should be life (or universe) at all is awe-inspiring to me. Given the billions of years that must have preceded life in the universe, its appearance is the closest thing I know of to a miracle. Given the scales of time and space involved, it's not unreasonable to believe that life was inevitable and that it simply had to wait for the right conditions. The "anthropic coincidences" of cosmology and physics suggests a universe fine-tuned for life and gives me pause to wonder if the conditions for life were truly inevitable on physical grounds.

The bottom line, to me, is that the question of The Creator is irrelevant to us. He's surely not a personal God.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service