Arguments From Ignorance (1/2)

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
46,841
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Apr 27, 2010

Science & Reason on Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/ScienceReason

"Arguments From Ignorance (Part 1/2)". This is a clip from The Atheist Experience #654 ("Viewer Calls. Jen & Matt take viewer calls on this 60 minute episode.") with Matt Dillahunty and Jen Peeples: http://blip.tv/file/3538527

---
Please subscribe to Science & Reason:
http://www.YouTube.com/Best0fScience
http://www.YouTube.com/ScienceMagazine
http://www.YouTube.com/ScienceTV
http://www.YouTube.com/FFreeThinker
---

NATURALISM

Naturalism (as distinct from Naturalist, Nature and Natural) refer to various topics within philosophy and science, environmental movements, and other areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism

---

OCCAM'S RAZOR

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor), is the meta-theoretical principle that "entities should not be multiplied beyond what is necessary" and the conclusion there of, that the simplest solution is usually the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

---

KALAM COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

The Kalām cosmological argument is a variation of the cosmological argument that argues for the existence of a Sufficient Reason or First Cause for the universe. Its origins can be traced to both medieval Christian and Muslim thinkers, but most significantly to Islamic theologians of the Kalām tradition. It has been revived in recent years most predominantly in the works of Christian philosopher William Lane Craig.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument

---

What is The Atheist Experience?

The Atheist Experience is a weekly cable access television show in Austin, Texas geared at an atheist and non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin (ACA), a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.

http://www.Atheist-Experience.com
http://www.Atheist-Community.org
http://www.NonProphetsRadio.com

Watch The Atheist Experience live:
• Ustream: http://tinyurl.com/TAEshow
• Channel Austin: http://tinyurl.com/TAEstudio
(Sundays 4:30 to 6:00 pm CST / 22:30-24:00 UTC)

Support the ACA (donations/membership):
http://www.Atheist-Community.org/join/
http://www.Atheist-Community.org/donate/

• Blog: http://AtheistExperience.blogspot.com
• Wiki: http://www.IronChariots.org
• DVDs: http://atheist-community.org/products
• Blip.tv: http://atheistexperience.blip.tv
• Cartoons: http://Atheist-Community.org/atheisteve/
• E-mail: tv@atheist-community.org
.

  • likes, 32 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • @bendlor

    But guess what? A god is NEVER going to present itself as evidence, because gods don't exist. No supernatural, mythological creature exists outside of the imagination of human beings (unless of course they write about these creatures in a book).

  • @Enayze "If the Muslims or Hindus get it right, I will still be ok" No you won't, because many of the rules and commandments that other religions have come up with are in direct contradiction with the ones you're following. You would be punished.

    "Don't hate me" Why would I hate someone I kind of feel sorry for? I'm more angry at the people that taught you all that crap.

    "you might not like the message, it still does not make it incorrect" Doesn't make it correct either.

see all

All Comments (865)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Occam is my favourite scholastic philosopher. As well as the famous razor, he also had a definition of existence: a thing can exist "in re" (as an actual thing), "in intellectu" (as an idea) and "in nomine" (as a mere name). I think where he was going with this was that Baal (say) exists only "in nomine" (we know nothing about him except his name); the biblical god exists "in intellectu" (as an idea and a social reality), but the Razor rules out his existence "in re". A closet 14th-c atheist.

  • @sfyr And you still have not shown us how the god hypothesis is logical or more supported than any other theory out there.

  • @sfyr Let me make this very clear. Atheism is simply and exclusively not believing in gods, deities or divinities. Any attitude, behaviour, theory, belief or value apart from that is not, specifically, a function of atheism. This isn't dumbing down the definition of atheism, this is what atheism means. Play with words all you like, but the singular thing in common amongst all atheists is that they don't believe in gods, deities or divinities.

  • @thomaseshuis

    Hmm.. Does that make it a false theory???

  • @sfyr "All Im saying is.. the God hypothesis has more going for it than other theories..` Ehm no it doesn´t. It only hypothesises WHO created the universe. It says nothing about HOW.

  • @sfyr Can you actually point out the effect in question? I mean, you said yourself we sin because we have free will and we're corrupted so we "sin" regardless of god's will. Which effect?

    .

    I'm saying there cause is the effect, so whatever caused the universe didn't necessarily have to consciously establish how it behaves. The "rules" of the universe are simply observations we have regarding how the universe behaves, not actual rules.

    .

    What knowledge could we even develop from such theory?

  • @Ebvardh

    What's your worldview:

    1 - God does not exist

    2 - I have no clue

  • @Ebvardh

    "How is that any different from an unreal one?"

    The real one has an effect >> the universe..

    "..the laws of cause and effect weren't existent."

    What if.. the moment at which god created the universe

    is the moment at which the universe came into being..

    Are you saying cause and effect can't be simultaneous???

    I get where you're coming from.. God's existence can't be proved..

    All Im saying is.. the God hypothesis has more going for it than other theories..

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more