We have experience of only one W i. We have no experience of any Zs at all.
Share2 Shares Religious topics abound on Listverse and they are frequently the most commented upon. It has been some time since the last one so it seems like the time is ripe for another — and this one is a great one for discussion.
Here we present five arguments in favor of the existence of God, and the counterargument for it.
Feel free to comment on the veracity or your opinion of each but remember to keep calm and argue reasonably. After all, it is our ability to be reasonable rationality which separates us from the other animals!
These all deal with the Judeo-Christian God. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, then taken up by Alvin Plantinga. If you believe he is necessary, then you must believe he exists. It is also criticized as a circular argument, revolving from a premise to a conclusion which relies on the premise, which relies on the conclusion.
An aspect of morality is observed. Belief in God is a better explanation for this morality than any alternative.
Belief in God is thus preferable to disbelief in God. This argument is technically valid, provided that the three constituents are accepted, and most critics refuse to accept the first. Morality, they argue, is not universal.
Murder was perfectly fine for the soldiers of the First Crusade, who slaughtered every man, woman, and child in Jerusalem in Thomas Hobbes argued that morality is based on the society around it, and is thus not objective.
The fourth proof originates from the degrees discovered in things. For there is discovered greater and lesser degrees of goodness, truth, nobility, and others. For those things which are the greatest truths are the greatest beings, as is stated in Metaphysics Bk.
Furthermore, that which is the greatest in its way, is, in another way, the cause of all things belonging to it; thus fire, which is the greatest heat, is the cause of all heat, as is said in the same book cf. Therefore, there exists something that is the cause of the existence of all things, and of goodness, and of every perfection whatever.
The most prevalent criticism of this argument considers that we do not have to believe in an object of a greater degree in order to believe in an object of a lesser degree. It begins as an argument from design, and then continues into something new.
In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought.
But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: It sounds powerful, and the final judgment on it is still out there. But in order to reject the assumption that human minds can assess the truth or falsehood of a claim, a human mind must assume that this claim is true or false, which immediately proves that human minds can assess the truth or falsehood of a claim.
Thus, the argument is better treated as a disproof of naturalistic materialism. However, given that most Atheists use naturalistic materialism as the foundation of Atheism, is is a very viable argument.
It was around before Aquinas, at least as early as Plato and Aristotle, and in basic terms, it goes like this: Every finite and contingent being has a cause. Nothing finite and contingent can cause itself.Oct 17, · Provided to YouTube by CDBaby What Are the Arguments Against the Existence of God?
· The Theology Program Trinitarianism ℗ Michael Patton Released on: Auto-generated by YouTube. The existence of God is a subject of debate in the philosophy of religion and popular culture..
A wide variety of arguments for and against the existence of God can be categorized as metaphysical, logical, empirical, or vetconnexx.com philosophical terms, the question of the existence of God involves the disciplines of epistemology (the nature .
But of the claim that a God exists includes that he presents supernatural events to us constantly, then one can, by proxy, have an argument proving that God does not exist because of His inactions. I would say that there is evidence (or lack or evidence) of no god.
The existence of these things suggests, at least to atheists and agnostics, that the Christian God of the Bible either doesn’t exist or he is an absentee creator who have no interest in these things.
Similar to the subjective arguments for the existence of God, subjective arguments against the supernatural mainly rely on the testimony or experience of witnesses, or the propositions of a revealed religion in general.. The witness argument gives credibility to personal witnesses, contemporary and from the past, who disbelieve or strongly doubt the existence of God.
The problem of evil refers to the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil with an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient God (see theism). An argument from evil claims that because evil exists, either God does not exist or does not have all three of those properties.
Attempts to show the contrary have traditionally been discussed .