Can "God" be found through reason?

[AisA]

But I'd like to stress a point that agnosticism is a concept that holds the question of the existence of god open, pending the arrival of more evidence.

In the absence of any evidence to support it, the notion that god is a possibility is arbitrary and should be dismissed. See post 219 in this thread for an explanation.

[TomL]

A person "comfortable" with agnosticism regarding god(s) is also going to be "comfortable" with agnosticism in other areas. He is not going to ever be serious about ideas or recognize their important to his life and happiness, because he can always just put them on the back burner, regardless of their importance.

A person "comfortable" with agnosticism is thus comfortable with not integrating the facts of which he is aware and agrees are true into wider, more profound concepts that are applicable in every day life, which makes him a lazy thinker, a responsbility shirker, and generally not someone who practices Objectivism in day-to-day life, even if they agree with most of premises of Objectivism (outside of remaining consistent with reality and not failing to integrate available facts, that is).

[annais]

I believe things have become clearer to me now. Atheism is not just a belief and an essential facet of Objectivism; it is the reality that man perceives and recognizes. It is not a negation of the existence of a god (thus, to disprove it's existence is not necessary) but an affirmation of reality. Therefore, Objectivism should be atheistic, not agnostic.

[Cole]

Are you saying that an objectivist is forced to recognize that god does not exist?

No, nobody is being forced to do anything. I'm saying that a person must be an atheist in order for them to be categorized as an "Objectivist." The term doesn't apply to anybody who is not an atheist.

What if a person is comfortable in agnoticism simply bcuz the existence or non-existence of a god is irrelevant to him, that he neither affirms nor denies a god's existence?

You have a poorly-formed definition of "atheism." The true meaning of the word (not necessarily the meaning most commonly used) is "without theism." This means that a person doesn't necessarily have to deny God's existence, or even make any claims about God. The word "atheist" applies to anybody who lacks a belief in God (is without theism).

I recommend that you read the entire discussion before posting a response. This way, points don't need to be needlessly repeated.

[Richard Roark]

Generally the way I put it in trying to explain to people the definition of an Atheist is somebody who has proven to himself that the existence of god is not possible, and thus affirming reality. Of course this doesn't go into the means of how one has worked out his or her proof. One of the reasons i do this is that I have encountered this poor logic, In order for you to deny the existence of something it must first exist. Yet, Coles example above is a really good definition as well.

[Cole]

Necessary_Truths, that was a brilliant explanation. You expressed it in ways that I had never thought of before, in the years I've been attempting to convince people of the validity of those ideas.

I've placed my emphasis on trying to prove that there is no middle-ground between the positive stances and the negative stances, and that everybody is either a theist or an atheist. People often get caught up on my use of the term "positive" to describe the claim made by theism, and misinterpet it as meaning "good" or "absolutely certain".

[Cole]

Yes, I didn't truly understand what the terms meant until I read Smith's book, either. I read the book before I was even a libertarian (which was before I was an Objectivist. My intellectual progression occured in reverse order of how it occurs for most people- I was a libertarian until I read Ayn Rand), and I now appreciate the Objectivist influences in the book.

[Richard Roark]

In fact, this was my first non-fiction philosophical book (I first read it eight years ago, back in high-school, while looking for arguments to support my conviction that Atheism/Antitheism was the correct position) and is my first true love, as far as non-fiction books go at least. It is also what (six years later) lead me to become an Objectivist; I highly recomend it to anyone interested in this topic.

I will definitely have to check out this book so that I can defend myself better against attack. For there is no other way of putting it. I find it ironic that I could care less if somebody has a belief in a god and won't try to convert them or persuade them otherwise, but the moment they find out your an Atheist, bam.

[HaloNoble6]

It's apparent that this thread did not lead to a conclusion due to evasion on the part of proponent(s) of the so-called entity 'God.' I'm closing this thread and attempting to start fresh with a new one. Please address the question of 'God' in this thread.