28 Oct 04
First let us define existence.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same.
If you consider this, then concepts exist too. Ideals exist as they are an influence on mankind and having one or another makes a difference in someone's behaviour.
Then, God is constantly shaping the behaviour of humans. Even an atheist by discussing it and waving his fists at the disregard for the absence of evidence in favour of God is behaving differently because of it.
We can then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by PalynkaNonsense.
First let us define existence.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same.
If you consider this, then concepts exist too. Ideals exist as they are an influence on mankind and having one or ano ...[text shortened]... erently because of it.
We can then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.
Your rational would also suggest that fairies exist, dragons exist, superman exists and any other subject you care to pick out of a hat.
What you are talking about is that a discussion on the existence of god exists, this does not prove the existence of god as an entity.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by StarrmanHow do you define existence then? Do concepts exists?
Nonsense.
Your rational would also suggest that fairies exist, dragons exist, superman exists and any other subject you care to pick out of a hat.
What you are talking about is that a discussion on the existence of god exists, this does not prove the existence of god as an entity.
Even for believers (except Michelangelo! 🙂 ) God is not a physical entity, therefore you could never prove it physically.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by PalynkaThere is a difference between a tangible reality and a concept. The concept of god exists, obviously, or I wouldn't have anything to argue about all day at work. This doesn't mean that the reality of god exists. I'm not even sure why I'm bothering with this one, it's futile and pointless.
How do you define existence then? Do concepts exists?
Even for believers (except Michelangelo! 🙂 ) God is not a physical entity, therefore you could never prove it physically.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by StarrmanOf course it's futile. That's the point, retorical exercise. Of course you can't see that and call it pointless.
There is a difference between a tangible reality and a concept. The concept of god exists, obviously, or I wouldn't have anything to argue about all day at work. This doesn't mean that the reality of god exists. I'm not even sure why I'm bothering with this one, it's futile and pointless.
Being a tangible reality was never even in question by non-believers and believers so your argument is flawed. The spiritual is, by definition, non-tangible that can have tangible effects.
God is a oncept and this concept influences your life. Non-tangible with an effect on tangible.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by PalynkaEven if I agreed with you, none of that is proof that anything more than the 'concept' of god existing.
Of course it's futile. That's the point, retorical exercise. Of course you can't see that and call it pointless.
Being a tangible reality was never even in question by non-believers and believers so your argument is flawed. The spiritual is, by definition, non-tangible that can have tangible effects.
God is a oncept and this concept influences your life. Non-tangible with an effect on tangible.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by Palynkahere a bunch more
First let us define existence.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same.
If you consider this, then concepts exist too. Ideals exist as they are an influence on mankind and having one or ano ...[text shortened]... erently because of it.
We can then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.
1. Does God exist? Throughout history, in all cultures of the world, people have been convinced there is a God.
2. Does God exist? The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.
3. Does God exist? Mere "chance" is not an adequate explanation of creation.
4. Does God exist? Humankind's inherent sense of right and wrong cannot be biologically explained.
5. Does God exist? God not only has revealed Himself in what can be observed in nature, and in human life, but He has even more specifically shown Himself in the Bible.
6. Does God exist? Unlike any other revelation of God, Jesus Christ is the clearest, most specific picture of God.
http://everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
the problem is:It takes a belief in God's existancce to accept them as proof of God's existance.
28 Oct 04
Originally posted by frogstompI agree with this part. My point was that my idea does not require the belief in God's existence to prove he exists.
the problem is:It takes a belief in God's existancce to accept them as proof of God's existance.
Please note that in the thread I say I'm an atheist...
28 Oct 04
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaOkay, I'll try and be more specific.
First let us define existence.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same. ...[text shortened]... an then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same.
You are confusing physical matter with the human perception of what its presence entails.
If you consider this, then concepts exist too. Ideals exist as they are an influence on mankind and having one or another makes a difference in someone's behaviour.
We perceive that concepts and ideals exist, but they have no physical presence. It is the electricity behind our thought processes and the air in our lungs when we discuss them that exists, not the concepts themselves.
Then, God is constantly shaping the behaviour of humans. Even an atheist by discussing it and waving his fists at the disregard for the absence of evidence in favour of God is behaving differently because of it.
Not true, the perception of what god is is what's being talked about here, the energy and matter that are required to voice this perception is not the same thing as how humans react when they are affected by it.
We can then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.
So no, we cannot conclude this at all. We can conclude that electrical impulses, changes in the forms of energy and the matter of the various parts of humans invlovled make a difference. The concept of god exists, but the existence of god is still in question.
28 Oct 04
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaThis is just a dumbed down ontological argument, and suffers the following flaw: First, you fail to distinguish between the concept 'God', and God. These are not the same thing. We use the former to think about and refer to the latter. So, when you argue that in virtue of the the concept 'God' existing, God must also exist, you are equivocating between two uses of the term "God", the first-order use that refers to the entity, and the second-order use that refers to the concept. This has been pointed out before in this thread; strange you don't see this obvious fallacy. It is in virtue of this equivocation that your argument, if it succeeded, would show that both everything exists and nothing exists (since both the concept 'everything' and the concept 'nothing' play a role in thought, and hence have effects, and hence satisfy your criterion for existence). Since your argument entails that both everything exists and nothing exists, it entails a contradiction. Any argument that entails a contradiction is incoherent, hence your argument is incoherent.
First let us define existence.
Something exists if it makes a difference. It's difference may be increasing the mass by an infinitesimal small quantity of a body, doesn't matter, if it was not there the universe would not be the same. ...[text shortened]... an then conclude that God makes a difference and therefore exists.