I remember discovered the full epistemological reasoning for the answer to this question being an interesting exercise. So, I ask, can God exist? Please provide as much context as necessary in your answer. What underlying principle must one contradict in order to believe that God exists? Can one really live at all by consistently acting in contradiction to this principle?
I know these are easy questions to many here, but we’ve got a new forum member that might like to express his argument for why He does exist. There also might be some people struggling with the answer to this question, so this discussion will be fruitful for them.
Update
In the discussion that ensues, please do not appeal to “higher authorities” (such as Aquinas and his “five ways”)–provide your own reasoning and logic as to your positions. Please keep your posts to-the-point and in terms of essentials, not particulars or minor technicalities; address one broad point at a time, not multiple ones in one post.
In the thread God, Part 1 (which was recently created as a split of the Atheist thread), several issues were addressed, namely the nature of existence as it relates to:
The concept “infinity” (which is a concept of method)
The Law of Causality
The so-called entity “God”
Since this is an update to the lead post of this thread, I ask that, aside from continuing discussions that have already been initiated, members present a definitive proof for why the so-called entity “God” can or cannot exist. Please ignore the fact that the question itself can be shown to be arbitrary, just as the question “Can globular clusters, whose defining characteristics aren’t found in a single other entity in reality, exist?” can be shown as arbitrary.
Note the importance of being clear with your concepts and definitions. If you think people might not understand a concept you’re trying to utilize (such as one of the three concepts I’ve listed above), explain its meaning clearly.
It’s AqAd, who’s posts can be read here. Most, if not all, of his posts are in defense of Catholicism. And I guess I only just noticed him, but he’s been a member for about a month.
I’m an Atheist, but I disagree with the Objectivist idea that “God” is contradictory because he exists, by definition, outside of reality. I’ve never heard a theist say they believe that God exists outside of reality.
Before anyone can argue for/against the existence of god, we have to have a DEFINITION of god. So: what IS god? What is the nature of god? What are its traits? What can it do/not do. If you cannot provide a definition or at least a description there are no facts in reality to reference in order to form the concept “god”, so debate about the existence/nonexistence of such a being or whatever is nonsensical.
It also has to be a POSITIVE definition, also, i.e. traits POSSESSED by god, not definition by negatives; traits NOT possessed by god. An example of this fallacy is the famous Ontological Proof of God forwarded by St. Anselem: defining god as “that which nothing greater can be conceived”. The continuation of his “proof” is that this undefined god then MUST exist in reality, because if it exists only in your mind, you can conceive of something greater, namely, a god that exists in reality, so in order to be the greatest thing that can be conceived, it has to actually EXIST.
Provide a list of the traits of god, and I will tell you why they are incorrect. I’m fed up with Catholics and other religious people telling me “but god CLEARLY exists” and then when I explain why their beliefs are contradictory and prove nothing, they proceed to change the terms of the argument by saying, “but that’s not what we actually believe. No one said we believe that.”
I’m an Atheist, but I disagree with the Objectivist idea that “God” is contradictory because he exists, by definition, outside of reality. I’ve never heard a theist say they believe that God exists outside of reality.
They don’t SAY it outright, it logically follows from their definition of what god IS, assuming they have one at all.
How? The most common explanation I’ve heard, from a scientific point of view, is that he exists in another physical dimension, which allows him to control the three in which we live. “Existing outside of reality” does not follow from this.
What do you mean “from a scientific point of view?” Do you mean that the idea of other, unpercievable “dimensions” is “scientific”? Or that this is the statistically most common “explanation” you’ve heard?
This explanation is the result of yet another vain attempt to find a “place” for God, however the existence of other “dimensions” has not been proven, merely postulated. In order for something in another dimension to “control” this one, there would have to be a MEANS of control, and thus the acting entity AND his dimension would have to be OBSERVABLE, (if only indirectly) and thus subject to a process of definition and proof. None of these conditions apply to this explanation; dimensions are not used in the sense of a part of reality, but as an unbounded, undefined realm OUTSIDE reality, OUTSIDE causalty, outside observation and thus, outside the possibility of definition or proof.
My understanding of the topic is simply this: By definition, god is an entity which exists outside this, our only perceivable reality. Thus, as a corolary, it would be impossible for a human to percieve it. It then becomes a self defeating impossibility.
I remember discovered the full epistemological reasoning for the answer to this question being an interesting exercise. So, I ask, can God exist? Please provide as much context as necessary in your answer. What underlying principle must one contradict in order to believe that God exists? Can one really live at all by consistently acting in contradiction to this principle?
I know these are easy questions to many here, but we’ve got a new forum member that might like to express his argument for why He does exist. There also might be some people struggling with the answer to this question, so this discussion will be fruitful for them.
Thank your this thread, as I am new here and this is a question that I struggle with. But for me, it doesn’t really matter whether God can exist or not. The question for me would be “Does it matter if God exists?” Would the mere objective proof of God’s existence change what is moral and valuable? If morality is objective, would the existence of God change that?
I’m an Atheist, but I disagree with the Objectivist idea that “God” is contradictory because he exists, by definition, outside of reality. I’ve never heard a theist say they believe that God exists outside of reality.
Would you mind reciting what you take to be the full Objectivist argument you refer to?
Thank your this thread, as I am new here and this is a question that I struggle with. But for me, it doesn’t really matter whether God can exist or not. The question for me would be “Does it matter if God exists?” Would the mere objective proof of God’s existence change what is moral and valuable? If morality is objective, would the existence of God change that?
That really depends upon what precisely you mean by “God”. It very well might change what is moral and valuable.
I’m an Atheist, but I disagree with the Objectivist idea that “God” is contradictory because he exists, by definition, outside of reality. I’ve never heard a theist say they believe that God exists outside of reality.
Theist’s expand reality to include a reality in which a god can exist in. He’s not here on Earth, he’s not in space somewhere. He’s in Heaven. where is this Heaven? It’s somewhere else. Where? Just somewhere else.
The question for me would be “Does it matter if God exists?” Would the mere objective proof of God’s existence change what is moral and valuable? If morality is objective, would the existence of God change that?
That would depend on God’s attributes and what it is capable of doing.
[C]an God exist? Please provide as much context as necessary in your answer.
God: A perfect being conceived as the creator of the universe, and worshipped in monotheistic religions.
Such a God cannot exist because the universe, as such, cannot be created in the physical realm. The universe is not an existent to be created. It is a name for the collection of all existents–like society is a name for a collection of people. To say that God created the universe is to say that he created every single thing that exists. Did he create your toothbrush?
Theists need to pinpoint exactly what God created. If a serious theist takes up this challenge, he might begin by putting forward the belief that God created the Earth or the Sun or Man. And in these cases he would need to provide some evidence before any rational thinker could take his claim half-way seriously. And if his God truly loves him and answers his prayers, I’m sure locating some evidence won’t be too difficult.
I’m an Atheist, but I disagree with the Objectivist idea that “God” is contradictory because he exists, by definition, outside of reality. I’ve never heard a theist say they believe that God exists outside of reality.
It is inherent in the notion that god created reality. If he created it, he must exist outside or independent of reality.
Thanks Rational One, I hadn’t noticed. Let me figure something out here. I’m going to temporarily suspend posts to see how I want to organize the threads.
Update
Okay, I have taken a look at the discussion on God in the Atheist thread (which I split into this thread), and it appears no conclusion was found due to massive evasion. I’m going to update the opening post for this thread so that it reflects the issues that were left unresolved in the previous thread. However, please carry on with already-introduced topics within this thread.