Blackpill The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

[IncelKing]

Clearly solid evidence supporting the existence of God is no where to be found. There’s no visible proof just like there’s nothing to support luck as being an actual phenomenon. The only real difference is what people choose to call it and that difference matters. To put more of a scientific spin on this let’s acknowledge two things:

1)Theory is defined as explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested
2) Hypothesis is defined as a suggested possible outcome and is testable and falsifiable.

With that in mind let’s compare the belief in God with the famous thought experiment of Schrodinger’s Cat. In the instance of Schrodinger’s Cat, the cat is simultaneously dead and alive yet we can't prove this because any attempt would be pointless, similar to the belief in God where the only possible way to find out God’s existence would be to die. However, doing so would not allow you to relay that information therefore making it pointless.

So although i dont BELIEVE in god because there is no evidence, at the same time i dont DISBELIEVE in god because:
THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE

Being agnostic is the most logical stance to take

 

[Deleted member 27249]

Evidince be like : I'm abscent

 

[Deleted member 17419]

 

[Personalityinkwell]

Everyone can pray the god he wants tbh.

Also religion is good to keep a healthy society.

 

[Deleted member 19079]

my nigga thats crazy but why is this in id

 

[HappilySingle]

So although i dont BELIEVE in god because there is no evidence, at the same time i dont DISBELIEVE in god because:
THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE

This is retard logic. It's impossible to prove something that doesn't exist. That's like saying there is a 50% chance of there being a flying invisible dragon from another dimension because we cannot prove there isn't one. The probability of there being a god is still abysmal compared to the probability of there not being one. This is like fox news. Take two equally retarded ideas and give them each equal coverage without actually doing any thinking.

 

[Deleted member 8353]

Whether or not there is a conscious creator doesn't change any of my beliefs. Be it a construct made by a conscious being, or a completely unconscious process, either way I reject it all wholly. Which is more likely is debatable, and imo, irrelevant. So I guess I agree with agnosticism in this sense.

Everyone can pray the god he wants tbh.

Also religion is good to keep a healthy society.

 

[Hate_my_life]

my nigga thats crazy but why is this in id

 

[Black Soul]

What useful things did atheism provide?
it gave fertile land for feminism and Hypergamy

 

[Deleted member 25707]

my nigga thats crazy but why is this in id

Because he coloured the words and used some complicated words.

Obligatory High IQ comment.

 

[IncelKing]

This is retard logic.

speak for yourself

It's impossible to prove something that doesn't exist. That's like saying there is a 50% chance of there being a flying invisible dragon from another dimension because we cannot prove there isn't one. The probability of there being a god is still abysmal compared to the probability of there not being one. This is like fox news. Take two equally retarded ideas and give them each equal coverage without actually doing any thinking.

just because something hasnt (yet) been proven to exist doesnt mean it doesnt actually exist.

During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered electricity, electricity still existed.
During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered gravity, gravity still existed.
During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered radiation, radiation still existed.

going by your logic electricity, gravity and radiation just happened to spontaneously come into existence upon human beings' discovery of it.

Whether something exists and whether humans have discovered it are independant of each other.

 

[HappilySingle]

speak for yourself



just because something hasnt (yet) been proven to exist doesnt mean it doesnt actually exist.

During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered electricity, electricity still existed.
During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered gravity, gravity still existed.
During the times when humans hadn't yet discovered radiation, radiation still existed.

going by your logic electricity, gravity and radiation didnt exist until humans discovered it. In other words, if we follow your logic, those concepts only came into existence upon human beings' discovery of it.

Whether something exists and whether humans have discovered it are independant of each other.

- You would have to be a fucking retard to not believe in gravity even if you couldn't prove it by the fact your couldn't fly.
- You would have to be a retard to believe in electricity before it was discovered. You couldn't even imagine it.
- Same for radiation.
- You would have to be a retard to believe that god can exist when it has never been discovered. It's pure fantasy.

 

[Deleted member 17419]

- You would have to be a fucking retard to not believe in gravity even if you couldn't prove it by the fact your couldn't fly.

JFL you realize they still don't have a satisfactory explanation for gravity despite trying for close to 100 years though right? Pretty bad example you got there.

 

[Cybersex is our hope]

What useful things did atheism provide?
it gave fertile land for feminism and Hypergamy

 

[Deleted member 22572]

There is no evidence to say that unicorns don't exist, therefore they exist.

 

[Billowel]

since this is a meme thread.

 

[IncelKing]

- You would have to be a fucking retard to not believe in gravity even if you couldn't prove it by the fact your couldn't fly.

Newton's second law of motion: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Everything in life is "cause and effect". Human beings are a highly intelligent species and have always observed certain "effects" but they weren't able to attribute the "cause" until much later.

A thousand years ago:
- humans knew that they would get sick if they came into contact with or were exposed to certain substances ("effect") they just didnt know that this was DUE TO radiation ("cause").
- humans knew that a tree which gets struck by lightning may catch on fire/be burnt ("effect"), they just didnt know that this was DUE TO conduction of electricity ("cause").
-humans knew that they couldn't fly and that they would die if they jumped off a cliff ("effect"), they just didnt know that its DUE TO gravity ("cause")

Not believing in the "concepts" of gravity, electricity or radiation in the MODERN ERA in which we KNOW it exists, isn't comparable to Not believing in gravity, electricity or radiation a thousand years ago in AN ERA PRIOR TO Isaac Newton's, Henri Becquerel's and Benjamin Franklin's discovery of those respective concepts.

Obviously at some point humans didnt believe in certain aspects of NATURE, but thats only because they werent aware of its existence, they were yet to discover it, yet those things still existed despite their lack of awareness of their existence, that is literally the point.

How can you be aware of and believe in the existence of X, when X is yet to be discovered?

Who knows, maybe one day god is discovered (assuming he even exists) and his existence becomes scientifically acknowledged, that doesnt mean that he never existed until we discovered him (at which point he spontaneously came into existence), he always existed, we were just yet to discover his existence.

Something cannot spontaneously come into existence at the moment that you discover it, that is logically impossible because for you to "discover" it in the first place means it must have "existed" to begin with. Something needs to FIRST EXIST, in order for it to THEN BE DISCOVERED.

Discovery of X ("effect") is a result of the existence of X ("cause").

We all know that the universe (the creation) is the "effect", but we are yet to discover the "cause" (the creator, if he exists).

There is no evidence to say that unicorns don't exist, therefore they exist.

that wasnt the point at all, no evidence pointing to the existence of unicorns doesn't mean that we can say (for sure, without a doubt) that they DON'T EXIST. It's possible that they exist but we are yet to discover them.

On the other hand, we can't say that unicorns EXIST (for sure, without a doubt) because there is no evidence to suggest they exist. It's possible that we havent discovered them because they dont exist in the first place

The only logical conclusion is to NEITHER believe NOR disbelieve in unicorns.

Not everything in life is binary where you have to either believe or disbelieve. "Not believing" in something isnt the same as "disbelieving" in it. Likewise, "believing" in something isnt the same as "not disbelieving".

 

[HappilySingle]

Newton's second law of motion: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Everything in life is "cause and effect". Human beings are a highly intelligent species and have always observed certain "effects" but they weren't able to attribute the "cause" until much later.

A thousand years ago:
- humans knew that they would get sick if they came into contact with or were exposed to certain substances ("effect") they just didnt know that this was DUE TO radiation ("cause").
- humans knew that a tree which gets struck by lightning may catch on fire/be burnt ("effect"), they just didnt know that this was DUE TO conduction of electricity ("cause").
-humans knew that they couldn't fly and that they would die if they jumped off a cliff ("effect"), they just didnt know that its DUE TO gravity ("cause")

Not believing in gravity, electricity or radiation in the MODERN ERA in which we KNOW it exists, isn't comparable to Not believing in gravity, electricity or radiation a thousand years ago in AN ERA PRIOR TO Isaac Newton's, Henri Becquerel's and Benjamin Franklin's discovery of those respective concepts.

Obviously at some point humans didnt believe in certain aspects of NATURE, but thats only because they werent aware of its existence, they were yet to discover it, yet those things still existed despite their lack of awareness of their existence, that is literally the point.

How can you be aware of and believe in the existence of X, when X is yet to be discovered?

Who knows, maybe one day god is discovered (assuming he even exists) and his existence becomes scientifically acknowledged, that doesnt mean that he never existed until we discovered him (at which point he spontaneously came into existence), he always existed, we were just yet to discover his existence.

Something cannot spontaneously come into existence at the moment that you discover it, that is logically impossible because for you to "discover" it in the first place means it must have "existed" to begin with. Something needs to FIRST EXIST, in order for it to THEN BE DISCOVERED.

Discovery of X ("effect") is a result of the existence of X ("cause").

We all know that the universe (the creation) is the "effect", but we are yet to discover the "cause" (the creator, if he exists).

Yes but you are talking about putting 50% probability that something exists when there is not one iota of scientific evidence. There is almost no distinction between being agnostic and being religious. Agnostic isn't half way between atheist and religious, it's not even comparable.

 

[IncelKing]

Yes but you are talking about putting 50% probability that something exists when there is not one iota of scientific evidence. There is almost no distinction between being agnostic and being religious. Agnostic isn't half way between atheist and religious, it's not even comparable.

where the fuck are you getting this 50% probability BS. Im saying that both cases are possible, not that they are equally likely to be true.
And besides, Something cant exist and not exist at the same time.

There are only 2 possibilities in relation to the existence of X
1. X exists. Meaning there is a 100% chance it exists and 0% chance it doesnt.
2. X doesn't exist. Meaning there is a 100% chance it doesnt exist and 0% chance that it does.

if something exists it exists.
If something doesnt exist, it doesnt exist.

Something cant 50% exist and 50% not exist, it either exists or it doesn't.

In fact, with the Schrodinger's cat experiment, One can actually find the cat either alive or dead at a certain point in time/space, however it is the superposition of states that defines the cat's wavefunction and it's collapse is actually a meaningful observation. Not being able to prove that the cat is both dead and alive is the entire basis for quantum mechanical uncertainty, it isnt pointless actually.

since this is a meme thread.

View attachment 288549

well then you'll enjoy reading it because you're a meme user

 

[IncelKing]

bump

 

[Animecel2D]

meme thread.

 

[Billowel]

bump

incelking.Supposing that you are curious to see if god exists,then i must say you are searching for him in the wrong places.I am not saying that we cannot use our intellectual faculties to find god.All i am saying is that if god is immaterial then he surely will never be found by "pure" science.If matter is not in his nature,then no matter how much you wish he will never be a material substance.I am sure that you feel confused by how something can exist but not be material(when i was an atheist i struggled with that),but as you read more about theology/philosophy you start to get a better idea and start seeing it's necessity.As i have said before go read the last superstition and answering atheism and i assume you will get an answer to most of your questions.

 

[Animecel2D]

Read every single word that was typed here

 

[Deleted member 18193]

The validity of the belief in God is not very clear in the past few threads, for the simply reason that it is personal and subjective. The fact that believing in God gives someone's life meaning is not evidence that God exists, it's more evidence that there is a psychological/mental benefit to believing in God. I think relgiliouscels are more interested in the emotional comfort their faith brings.

For me, faith did not help me, therefore I discarded it.

 

[IncelKing]

What useful things did atheism provide?
it gave fertile land for feminism and Hypergamy

Powerful individuals restructuring society through: political, legal , financial, economic and social means is an inevitable reality. Religion has nothing to do with this, irregardless of whether someone is "religious" or not, every human being is hardwired to act in self-interest and do what benefits themselves even at the cost of others.

Those who introduced religion (the "prophets") claimed to be God's "messenger", acting as an intermediary who was supposedly able to communicate God's message to Humans through revelations which he alone (how convenient lol) received from God. The holy book was essential for controlling the populace, as people would follow anything written in the Holy Book under the belief that they were following God's commands, when in reality they were following the commands of one very smart individual (The Prophet) who was fooling everybody into doing what he wanted, using the authority of a "higher power" to gain rapid support and unquestionable loyalty.

Of course, "God" had commanded the "chosen people" of the land to take up arms and wage war against foreign lands in order to bring the infidels into the "light of the Lord". Seeing as though most people are of a follower's mindset, it didnt take long for the prophets to radicalise their local populations whom they used to build an army, which they used to conquer a city at a time, gaining more resources and increasing the size of their army with every successful battle, until they forged an empire. But simply having an empire wasnt enough, next they decided to launch military campaigns against OTHER EMPIRES in order to expand their own.

(It's funny isn't it, it doesnt matter what we want. Once we get it, we want something else.)

But seriously, religion has always been used to exploit people's emotions and their desire to feel "cared for" and "protected" rather than feeling like they've been abandoned and left alone in a cruel, unjust world. It was used by the prophets to present themselves as an extension of God's will, influencing people to be subservient to them. Religion was never about benefitting society, it was created to benefit a very small minority of individuals who gained significant power through acquisition of resources: land/territory, human capital (soldiers, builders, doctors, farmers etc., gold and various natural resources, wealth...). They used religion to create a slave population who broke their backs to build cities and literally fought and died in wars so that the select few people at the top could prosper.

So you see, its not just atheists who have caused a decrease in quality of life for the average male, those who founded religions have been doing the same for milennia.

 

[IncelKing]

Evidince be like : I'm abscent

yes