Question:
Atheists can you answer this question? Which group of atheists is right?
?
2012-07-16 13:23:52 UTC
Here is the riddle: Without evading or answering the question with a question....

Fact: We all know there are atheists and agnostics both that say that it is possible God exists.
Fact: We also know there are atheists that claim it's impossible for God to exist.

So let's get 333 atheists that claim it's possible and another 333 atheists that say it's impossible.
We put all of them in a house. So we have 666 atheists in a house but they are all making contradictory claims?

Since it is irrational for all the atheists to be right
Since it is impossible for all the atheists to be right
Since the atheists are contradicting each other...

Here is the question. WHICH GROUP OF ATHEISTS ARE RIGHT AND WHY?
Without evading or answering the question which group are right?

The 333 claiming possible or the 333 claiming it's impossible.

And since atheism is contradicting itself doesn't this make atheism null and void?
25 answers:
Aggy
2012-07-16 13:40:18 UTC
You say: "And since atheism is contradicting itself doesn't this make atheism null and void?"



How does the fact that two groups of atheists with differing views render BOTH positions untenable? One position could still be correct.
The Mind Of Clive Jones
2012-07-16 13:39:27 UTC
Whether they claim god is possible or not IS NOT A PART OF ATHEISM.

How many time do you people have to be told? Atheism is the disbelief in god. NOTHING ELSE. CLAIMS THAT GOD EXISTS OR DOES NOT EXIST OR MAY EXIST IS CALLED GNOSTICISM (or agnosticism).



Your argument is as retarded as "Well some atheists like cats and some dont so that means they are contradicting themselves so atheism is void herpderderp".



And the fact you link the stupidest man in history ShockOfGod tells us everything.



And lastly even if your argument wasn't this dumb, even if it was right. Either god exists or it doesn't. So if you think atheists having an argument about something is going to magically make god appear then you really must think very highly of our powers. Because that's the only way your whole 'argument' would be even relevant.



And to answer your question, since i do not KNOW if god exists or not, how the hell can I say who is right? Unlike Christians I dont claim ultimate knowledge of the unknown. That's because I'm honest.



Oh and if one atheist being wrong in a youtube video == atheism is wrong (which only works if you still have not educated yourself on what atheism means), then you should stop believing on god because there are thousands of examples of theistic fails on youtube alone.
Tzeench
2012-07-16 13:33:23 UTC
This by no mean makes atheism null and void. The only Thing that all atheists universally have in common is the disbelief in any god(s). The argument over whether it's possible for a god to exist or not is a separate issue entirely.



Besides I have yet to see a Side of an issue that all theists are united on besides the position that they believe that a god(s) exist. Since theistic ideas on what god is exactly contradicts each other does that make theism null and void? I don't think so.



Edit- the two groups of Atheists You described both have the common disbelief in any god(s) which is what defines them as atheists. It doesn't really matter whether or not if they disagree over whether or not the existence of a god is possible or not, they still share that common disbelief that any god(s) exist.
Gerry S
2012-07-16 13:44:09 UTC
Actually, I've never heard an atheist claim it is "impossible" for a god to exist. Every atheist I've met (aside from a few actual idiots) simply says there's no evidence to support the premise that any gods exist. On that basis (complete lack of evidence) they choose the contrary conclusion: no gods exist.



All the rest of your post is based upon that false premise.



EDIT: Oh, and one more fallacy you've called upon: that atheism is self-contradictory, thus "null and void". Atheism makes no claims - (some) atheists do. Since it's individuals, and not a cohesive group making the claims, the claims are no self-contradictory. If we followed your "logic" on this, any disagreement between any two theists would make theism "null and void", which is ridiculous.
Katy
2012-07-16 13:41:17 UTC
Being 'right' or 'correct' here is impossible to know objectively.



The first group of atheist/agnostics are more likely to be more specific about a god's possible existence. They would probably say there's no proof of god, therefore they don't believe a god exists, but are open to the possibility of being wrong. That is, maybe we will find something that supports god's existence, and maybe they'll accept it as such.



The second group will say there will never be proof of god to change their mind, because god doesn't exist. And if he/she/it doesn't exist, there's nothing to 'prove' he/she/it does.



If we could know which group was right, we would have to have a god-like knowledge, because that is akin to knowing the absolute truth of the universe. We won't ever know, we can only believe or think in a way that makes logical sense to us as individuals.



And your last question is nonsensical. There are less contradictions among atheists than there are among religious groups, if you think about. If your point had merit, then the fact that Christians and Jews believe differently makes them null and void. Same with Muslims and Wiccans and Buddhists and the like. The different religions often contradict each other, and you can't forget about the multiple factions within each religion who disagree on different tenets of faith. They are more divided than your hypothetical group of atheists, but I doubt you'd say their existence is null and void based on that argument alone.
2012-07-16 13:38:17 UTC
You act as if atheism is a positive belief when it is not. It is the absence of a belief in any god so it does not matter whether someone believes a god definitely does not exist or probably does not exist as that is still atheism. It is like how you can't say non sports playing is self contradictory just because some people who don't play sports are willing to play sports and some are not. The burden of proof is on the theist to prove god does exist not the other way around.
2012-07-16 13:35:56 UTC
It works like this:



Regardless of what anyone says:



1. We start from the assumption there is no God - we do this because we do this with EVERY other assumption in the world - ie innocent until proven guilty. There is no proof of God - so until data comes in - there is no God. Anyone who says there is -is working from personal faith and has no evidence.



2. Theists presume God is the 1st cause of the universe and also say "something cannot come from nothing" - if true - God cannot exist for he comes from nothing.

If God does not need a 1st cause,then the universe does not either - so God is moot and void.



It is not impossible that a given group are correct - as they were about the round earth and heliocentric solar system - I am right- because I just proved I am .



I disagree with agnostics because they are failing to follow the rules of reason (as per 1.) - they have a "faith" or are sitting on the fence in terms of personal belief.



Facts are not a matter of personal hearsay - I just proved God doesn't (or needn't) exist.

There is nothing to prove he does - ergo the best bet is atheism that says he doesn't.



If you think atheism fails in any of the ways you just added then you really are as dumb as I thought you were in the 1st place - perhaps I was wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt and "presume you innocent". The evidence speaks for itself.
2012-07-16 13:27:09 UTC
> And since atheism is contradicting itself doesn't this make atheism null and void?

No. By the same logic you could say that Christianity is null and void because you could get 333 Christians that believe in the Trinity and 333 Christians that don't believe in the Trinity.



What you're doing is mixing Agnostic and Gnostic Atheists together and then trying to claim a contradiction. They're all atheists, the difference is the agnosticism. You can't just redefine words to suit your purpose.
2012-07-16 13:34:38 UTC
What could possibly make you think that an "appeal to popularity" fallacy would be of any use?



If 10,000,000 christians claim god is real, does that mean god is real? Of course not.



We decide things by evidence, not popularity or numbers.



Now let's clarify one more thing -- you weren't at all specific about "god." Most atheists will honestly admit that *some* kind of god is "possible." But specific human-claimed gods may not be "possible" at all. That's not a contradiction, and that something is "possible" but lacks any evidence to show it's plausible or actually exists is essentially worthless anyway.



So you messed up your question, and you based it on a silly fallacy...want to try again?



Peace.
Pyriform
2012-07-16 13:35:57 UTC
I think it depends on what exactly one means by 'God'. I suspect that those who say it is impossible that God exists are thinking of the all loving genocidal maniac described in the Bible, who is omnibenevolant but condemns the majority of people to eternal torment. I certainly cannot see how such a god could exist, so I would think it quite reasonable to say it is impossible. But it is quite possible that some god exists, possibly even one of which the Bible portrays a gross distortion.



We cannot really make a definite decision on which group is correct without further clarification. Atheists will tend to disagree with each other on matters of opinion, anyway. It is not as though we have an omnipotent being revealing the truth to us. What is your excuse?
Moonshadow
2012-07-16 13:30:15 UTC
I am agnostic Atheist, which means that I don't believe in God but I think there's a chance (a very very small chance)

Gnostic atheists are that second group you're talking about.



If you're claiming this makes Atheism invalid, look at all the different variations of different religions.
neil s
2012-07-16 13:30:42 UTC
These claims are only contradictory if we assume the word "God" is being used in the same way by each group. There is nothing in your story that requires this assumption.



Atheists can claim 1) that a God (in general) may exist, while also asserting 2) that many specific Gods (such as the Abrahamic God) can be shown to be non-existent.
Samwise
2012-07-16 13:56:55 UTC
So, if I disagree with another Christian (for example, since I'm Protestant, the Pope) does that make all Christianity "null and void"?



You've confused individuals with the category, and (worse, because much more stupid) the category with the individuals. So would you rather be lumped into a category of "stupid people" or simply considered as someone who made one error in logic?
Michael Darnell
2012-07-16 14:27:55 UTC
The word atheist means only "someone who does not Believe in any God", so your question is an example of the logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking).



Nice try little troll, run along to bed now, the grown ups are having a conversation.
Stevie M
2012-07-16 13:41:01 UTC
Part of the problem may be definitions.



I've heard some definitions of god (e.g., supernatural humanoid being inhabiting the sky) that I happen to think are impossible.



I've heard some definitions of god (e.g., spiritual presence which warms one's heart) that aren't strictly impossible but are just silly.



I've also heard some definitions of god (e.g., love) that are just language games.



The weird thing is how people with wildly different definitions ("god is superman", "god is ghostie", "god is love") all pretend that they're talking about the same thing.



My atheism is based on the fact is that even the people who believe in such a thing can't agree on what it is they believe in. Impossible, possible -- depends on your definition, and I'm not interested in defining it for you.
2012-07-16 13:31:36 UTC
Contradiction does not equal null and void. The same could be posited about christianity..... Since there are 30,000 different christian religions that cantradict eachother does that make christianity null and void? Seriously it contradicts itself so badly that there are 30,000 DIFFERENT opinion about what christianity really is..... compare that to your example of 2 different schools of atheism.... Who do you think loses here?
Speed
2012-07-16 13:33:19 UTC
Half the people who don't collect stamps think there is no God. Half think there could be a God. Does this make not collecting stamps null and void?



Your argument is just as silly.
Citation Needed
2012-07-16 13:42:34 UTC
You can't say with certainty that anything's impossible. But why does matter some atheists have different views? There's over 10,000 denominations of Christianity.
Johnny
2012-07-16 13:36:06 UTC
Atheist that say a god(s)/goddess(es) could exist aren't actually atheist. I have eliminated the need for the question. Where's my reward?
firpi
2016-10-31 15:56:59 UTC
it really is the placement with Christians... their in straightforward words Christians on the weekend... flow ask a clergyman about the goings on, and ask him why such dealings are ok for that diverse crew... then carry it to the interest of their mum and dad. it truly is marvelous how the Catholic faith does those products continuously, how are you going to believe a faith the position it truly is own God breaks his commandments at the same time as he sees in wonderful condition... possibly you want to believe what we've our entire lives... God isn't there... and in spite of if he's... he would not care.
Chris
2012-07-16 13:38:18 UTC
Well first of all there is something like 38000 denominations of Christianity, second those who say it is possible should be considered agnostics not atheists
2012-07-16 13:28:39 UTC
Either you're incredibly dumb and you've never heard of sects, catholics, orthodoxy, protestants, and the half a billion denominations of protestant christianity. OR You're trolling but not being all that subtle about it.



Either way, you suck.
Russ
2012-07-16 13:28:34 UTC
What you just did:

HALF the christians say the bible should be taken literally

Half say the bible is meant to be taken figuratively



LOL THEY CANT ALL BE RIGHT SO THEY MUST ALL BE WRONG SINCE ITS CONTRADICTING ITSELF



LOLOLOLHERPDERP
2012-07-16 13:26:11 UTC
Oh boy, a question for atheists!
FeverishTempura
2012-07-16 13:33:51 UTC
i like to poop


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...