Why I'll Probably Never Be a Theist Again

Thanks to DasAmericanAtheist for his featuringfulness! He is a man very tolerant of my low-quality microphone. If you haven't subscribed to him yet, I highly recommend that you do, as his videos are both informative and interesting (and monochrome):
http://www.youtube.com/user/DasAmericanAtheist

------------------------------------

A look at why it is impossible to have knowledge of an omniscient god's existence - basically a refutation of gnostic theism.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• god
• theism
• atheism
• universe
• agnosticism

[cypherpunk11]

Science damn it! Where are the rabid theists shouting that you're all going to Hell? I wanted to read some ignorant, baseless debate on how we're all godless, sinning heathens.

[Sannit]

I have received some personal attacks via message, but nobody saying I'm hellbound. I think it's weird, too.

Maybe I should make a video about how I'm not going to hell. Perhaps that will prompt the proper improper response.

[gremlinn7]

Hmm...I think set C should probably have intersected A and B - after all, there's a certain core of basic knowledge that any sentient being would have.

[Sannit]

And here I was hoping nobody would notice that.

[00clouds00]

@cypherpunk11

OUR CREATION IS ALIVE because OUR CREATOR IS ALIVE....very simple really...WHO? in their right mind ,,,,wants to be separated from LOVE and ENERGY forever????

[thalamay]

"Less extraordinary claim, less evidence."

Agreed, but the important word here is evidence, it's not proof. For me, to believe in a god, the evidence would have to be quite extraordinary, but theoretically, I could settle with that, just as I accept that the earth goes around the sun. That's my whole point. You seemed to have said that you won't turn into a believer because there cannot be proof. All I'm saying is that it doesn't take proof to accept a proposition, evidence can be enough...

[SocialAnathema]

So god wouldn't ever have any way of knowing if they were god. I'll be digesting this one for a bit. Briliant video.

[gremlinn7]

Ha! I majored in math, and I'm a new subscriber...I'll be keeping an eye on you. By the way, love your style and thoroughness.

[Sannit]

The test is so rigorous only because of the sheer amount of information in the universe - you could correctly identify the position/momentum of every particle in the Virgo supercluster and still have revealed essentially nothing about the universe.

Also, the sky being blue only requires it to diffuse visible light in a certain way, a way it's easy to demonstrate it does. Less extraordinary claim, less evidence.

Anyway, intriguing comment. My thoughts are provoked. *doesn't believe in sky*

[Sannit]

While I agree that we can never have absolute proof for anything, I don't think the information you'd require from an entity in a test for its godhood constitutes "absolute proof." To do that, you'd have to consider the possibility of things like the entity guessing correctly, having mistakes in your test, having flaws in your own observational skills, etc.