http://spikedhumor.com/articles/151005/Fre...fs-for-God.html

Very very thorough analysis of the argument that "god exists"

If any Athiests have problems with Theists trying to make claims that your non-beleif is wrong then this video gives very solid justifyable reasons for what you don't belive..

ENJOY!

A little long and slow, but a very nice video nonetheless. Thank you.

Unfortunately, despite how well it was presented theists will still chose to believe and the only thing I cannot understand is why.

If I am getting this guy right, the proof is in the probablity? I do not think that the probabilities is proof of God. Granted, if he was proposing that you cannot say God doesn't exist, because of these probabilities, then he's proven his case. And I'm glad he put forth the definations of what proof is, but I think he still just showed that the subjective thought of the probabilities of God's non-existence, is the proof of God's existence. If that is the case he did that, I do not think it worked.

The dragon analogy thing was great

if god by definition is nonexistant
then that Definition is Wrong
thus all attempts at proof fail because of the rock/fish arguement.

No probabbilities of existance had nothing to do with any points he made... it was all philisophical investigation on the arguments people put forward for gods existance.. basicaly god can't exist because by definition of himself and by definition of all the allowances people make for his existance (can't be detected in any way shape of form but he can still effect our lives) he CAN'T exist...

Have a watch... it's kinda long but it's worth it..



Unfortunetly that doesn't work... you can't change the definition of existance because it allows for all forms of existance possible (matter, energy) he covers this aspect of faith magicaly taking away all requirements for existance until nothing is left... so Gods existance is exactly the same as his non-existance.. therefore.. he doesn't exisist.. you can't have something that "is & isn't" at the same time... the human race has developed it's philisophical sciences far enough to be able to quickly weed out when a statement is non-sence... "god exists" is one of them that only narrow "faith" can keep hold of...

This is a textbook example of logic breakdown - the speaker's. It just goes to show that human logic often fails to be able to "handle the truth."

One thing is for sure. If I ever suffer from insomnia and I just can't get to sleep..... all I have to do is run this link again, or just think about it. I will be sawing logs like a well-fed baby in minutes!

So for that, I am grateful.

the issue is that many argue informally, few argue formally to even appraise an argument we have to determine if its valid or not and validity is a concept derived from formal logic, a vaild argument is truth preserving.....In any formal argument it has to be vaild or sound ...
your question is more closely linked to the scientific argument an example of an argument field , there are off shoots such as normal science, revolutionary science , then there are paradigm disputes etc.... reasonlng with rules, clearly defined standards exist for what counts as evidence.....

this video is okay for a basic understanding of argumentation of what I saw it kept cutting out.. my area of study is philosphy ( relgious in particular) jand kudos to the thread starter...

it really helps to understand the methodology of argumentation and its a very profound area........

Truth is in the eye of the beholder, Yeti. We have no way of knowing what's true and what's not unless we experience said event personally. Therefore, we can't be 100% certain of ANYTHING unless we were there when it happened. Merely saying "human logic can't handle the truth" is being ignorant. There is no "truth" as we know it, so there is no method of knowing what the "truth" really is. You can get as much evidence for something as you want, but unless you were there and saw the event happening, there is no way to know what is really "true". This applies for history, science, and religion, even. No one alive today saw what happened 2000 years ago, so we don't know if Jesus was real, or what he did, or what he taught. We can't say for sure. All we can do is make educated guesses. The fact is, no one knows, and no one will ever know; we just need to accept that.

That very well may be Lady O. But you have to admit that this guys presentation is by far better than a high dosage of Sominex!

God is mankind's most enduring concept.

Definitely.

i meant the definition of God is contradictory therefore the only way "god exists" is correct is if the definition of "god" is wrong

this means one is describing a fish then arguing its a rock.

the only other way is if god is the universe. which would be like this you take a canvas paint a picture on it.

now for ground rules:
1 any thing that leaves the painting ceases to exist
2 nothing new is added to the painting.
3 the painting may rearrange the paint already in it.

now as a resident of such a painting:
one can never leave to ascertain it is painting. thus never understanding the how.
can never "own" it in the material sense
the painting is alive because of the evolution rule yet no one can evolve past it without becoming the painting.
yet the painting can never evolve past a painting only regress into a dot and explode into a new painting.
one cannot meaure it since you cannot leave it to ensure thats the end.
the painting would be all knowing and all powerful. since it would be aware and in control of everything as a part.
it cannot die or know what it will do tomorrow because time only is conceivable in the picture not as a picture.

the only thing is "how did it start" but by the logic of our freind in the vid the universe is in the same boat. the universe may be infinite scientists dont know but i say it is the paradox of existense=non existence. which then leads to madness so for you lesser minds ill stop right there.