• meep_launcher@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Look, I get that kids these days trash devil’s advocates, but have you seen the advocates for god?

  • ConHoliousDonFrankle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    To me, the #1 foam finger reason god doesn’t exist is the ability to lie and to believe in lies. As we continue to progress, so do both of these abilities. god didn’t start but was built over time through the evolution of faith. Beginning with aspects of daily life, growing to aspects beyond the life of anyone. It grows in conjunction with a control system. As more people are controlled, lies are refined through tangible experiences and reactions. When lies fail , so does the control. When they succeed, control grows, and “proof” that the lie is a lie is discounted more. A lie is easy in the beginning but always requires more lies to prop it up and exponentially more to make it broader. religion follows this pattern, and the greatest lie is faith.

  • unmagical
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    I don’t know if the greatest argument for vs the greatest catalyst for. I didn’t become an atheist because of Christians, but I sure as hell started looking for answers because of them.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Nah, I just hate god. Problem? 😉

    Look at this mess of a world. Why hasn’t god fixed anything? god is a deadbeat parent, not worthy of my respect, or even attention.

    F*ck god lol

    • MediumGray@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      I mean, assuming the existence of a god, I don’t disagree. But if you are assuming the existence of a god then you’re not really atheist. This is the kind of misinterpretation that theists who can’t imagine not believeing in the supernatural often make about atheists; that we’re simply angry or confused rather than rejecting the paradigm altogether.

      • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        For all intents and purposes, dystheism is the same as atheism. Especially if it’s agnostic dystheism, as I’m guessing it usually is.

    • yokonzo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m an atheist and I hate other atheists, it’s snarky comments and injecting themselves into conversations more than even Christians. It’s to the point where I would even consider some of them religious but their religion is atheism

      • Ekky@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s gotten to the point where many atheists appear to fanatically believe in science, but without believing in the scientific method on which science itself builds.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Wrong. The greatest argument against gods is the absence of evidence for their existence. Also, no argument is needed. The burden of proof lies with those making the claim.

    • affiliate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      isn’t this more of an argument for agnosticism? atheism makes the claim that god does not exist, while agnosticism says it’s impossible to know either way.

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s impossible to know whether the Earth is controlled by a secret cabal of Reptilians.

        Still, I am not a Reptilian agnostic. Agnosticism to me sometimes feels like the enlightened centrism of religion.

        • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Agnosticism leaves the door open to the idea that our reality and our universe could be artificial on a level outside of our perception, on a fundamental level, though for what purpose, I’d say it would be impossible to know.

      • creation7758
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Depends on what your definition is. As how I and from my experience, most atheists define atheism, atheism is the lack of belief in god for whatever reason. Your reasoning for this can stem from gnosis (knowledge) or agnosticism (without knowledge).

        Most atheists are agnostic atheists, who do not make any claims regarding the knowledge of existence of any particular gods.

        Gnosticism/Agnosticism is a separate concept from theism/atheism and can be applied to other concepts, not just gods.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Wrong again. Atheism is the absence of belief in gods. If you claim that gods don’t exist, you have the burden of proof again and that is impossible to prove.

        • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          What is an atheist on a planet of atheists?

          If nobody believes in God, then there’s no one to convince anyone, and there’s nothing to convince.

          Are you implying people naturally believe in a god and it has to be denied? I sure didn’t.

            • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              If you claim God does not exist, you get the burden of proof

              This is only true if the general consensus is “God exists”.

              If no one has any concept of God to begin with, then what are you arguing?

        • affiliate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          okay i looked it up and apparently atheism can mean a lot of different things. it can mean you either believe there is no god, or that you are basically agnostic, or something in between. (at least that’s what i got from the wikipedia page.) but anyways, the whole “burden of proof” argument does not apply to all forms of atheism, as certain kinds of atheism involve an active belief that no god exists. however, the “burden of proof” argument does apply to all forms agnosticism. so it is still a better argument for agnosticism than it is for atheism.