Atheists say: God doesn't exist since I can't see Him. So atheists, does nothing exist for the blind?

Question

Sounds a bit silly huh? Maybe you should rethink your position.

Answer 1

that's not why we say god doesn't exist.It's because of the lack of evidence of a god and the mounds of evidence that there isn't one. But why try to speak logically to someone so willfully ignorant. #siencedoesn'tgivea$hitaboutyourbeliefs

Answer 2

You're no good at this logic thingie - give it up ;)





“Humanity was plodding along and then one day some smartarze suggested thunder was caused by an invisible man in the sky.



We've been asking for evidence ever since.

You never provided any...

Cos if you did have some you wouldn't have to pull the "Have Faith" card.



YOU are the people insisting an imaginary little hairy-nosed psychopath is swooping about in the ether doing the worst possible mayhem on innocent children... NOT I?



If I told you I had a Pixie in my pocket I'm sure you'd ask to see it..

So what we are asking is... produce your Pixie ;)”



Frank Zindler: Remember that the burden of proof is on the person alleging the existence of something.

If someone tells me that the Easter Bunny is hiding in somebody's clothes closet somewhere in North America, there is no need for me to search every closet on the continent.

The person making the claim has to produce the rabbit or stop wasting my time.

~

Answer 3

Begging the question (Latin petitio principii, "assuming the initial point") is a type of informal fallacy in which an implicit premise would directly entail the conclusion. Begging the question is one of the classic informal fallacies in Aristotle's Prior Analytics. Some modern authors consider begging the question to be a species of circulus in probando (Latin, "circle in proving") or circular reasoning. Were it not begging the question, the missing premise would render the argument viciously circular, and while never persuasive, arguments of the form "A therefore A" are logically valid. Thus, one could "fix" the fallacy by essentially taking the conclusion as given in the premises, but that would be uncharitable insofar as it ruins any rhetorical value in the original performance of an informal argument.[1]



In modern days, English speakers are prone to use "begs the question" as a way of saying "raises the question". However, the former denotes a failure to explicitly raise an essential premise, so that it may be taken as given, whereas the latter simply functions as a segue for whatever comes to mind.



Lying For Jeezus is still LYING; Thank you for the added evidence that religion = BAD morals.



-I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.- Steven Roberts.

Answer 4

I'm an atheist and I don't actually say that - What I do say is this;



Unless you produce evidence to support the assertion your God exists, then I have no reason to believe you. It does not have to be visible, it could be audible, or something we can touch, or something detectable with instruments, or some kind of litmus test, or measurements of your God's footprint or shoe size, etc. but you have nothing at all. That's not just a matter of invisible. You want me to believe you aren't just a liar? Prove what you say is true.



Straw man arguments are not adequate.

Answer 5

Poe's law states:

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.



That certainly applies to your question, especially the irony of calling atheists silly and that they need to rethink their position. In case you are actually a bit mentally challenged though I will point out atheists don't lack beliefs in gods because they are invisible but rather because there is no objective, verifiable evidence for them. There is for things that actually exist generally many nonvisual lines of evidence. Hearing, touching, repeated consistent experiences, etc... There are a wide variety of things no one can see but we can reasonable believe based on other consistent evidence, atoms, black holes, protons, so on. Unlike god claims there is consistent and verifiable by all evidence for them though. Not the case for any god so far.

Answer 6

If that is your logic then you are a dumb ****. Can you see gravity? No. But you can see its affects. We dont believe in god because there is not logical reason to believe in a diety with no physical evidence beyond that of a 2000 year old book written by man almost 50 years after jesus supposedly died. The first author paul knew nothing of the life that jesus supposedly lived prior to being crucified, resurected and his assention into heaven. All of which have no historical documentation to support that it ever happened. Do you know anything about Dionysus, Mythra or Osiris? Well all three have almost identical stories of death resurection and then assention to heaven Dionysus and Osiris actually came back after 3 days....you know how your church explains all this? Satan went back in time to recreate forgeries of jesus life in an attempt to sway christians from god.....and yes this is how the church explains it even to this day. I could lay down mountains of evidence for you but it would all be for not. If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence can I provide to prove you should value evidence? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument can I invoke to prove you should value logic?

Answer 7

Sounds silly? There's no sound involved - we're typing here, not talking. If you want to be pedantic about words mean, that is. And are completely blind to the idea that "sounds" or "see" can be used metaphorically as well as literally.



Or when someone says "I see what you mean" do you wonder how they could possibly have visualized the fact that you just told him how much you loved dancing by yourself to old Justin Timberlake videos? He doesn't have a secret camera, does he? No.

Answer 8

Perhaps you should rethink your claim. No atheist ever said that god does not exist because we cannot see him, but because he can't see, hear or touch, cannot hear see or touch anything that is a tangible manifestation of god's existence, and because we can rule out god's possibility simply showing the logical contradictions in his claimed essential characteristics.



You have just ridiculed yourself with your silly claim and lack of logic.

Answer 9

How childish. I don't believe in God because there is no reason to, not because i can't see him. I can't see, and never have seen, the north pole, yet i believe it is there because there is evidence such as stories, photographs and videos. The world exists for blind people because they can still experience it by feeling it, smelling it and hearing it. Grow up, and think more carefully before you post such rubbish.

Answer 10

Actually, no atheist says that. I can't "see" gravity, but I have evidence that it exists. There is no such evidence for the existence of a god. It has nothing to do with being able to physically see him.

Answer 11

No, atheists do not say that - that's a very simplified version of what most atheists believe. I do not say that God doesn't exist - I say that I don't believe that God exists - are you intelligent enough to see the difference?

Answer 12

Tyrone played spin doctor on the spin doctors(I'm not talking about the musical group. Don't want to leave room for miss stating, simplifying, or misconstruing).Looks like he has found an arguement against atheism thats as rediculous as the atheist argument itself. Aren't atheist always "miss stating positions", and simplifying Christian principles " when they know full well what we are talking about"? These guys want to believe in God, thats why their conversation is obsessed with disproving him. To talk about God as much as they do, they must be struggling in their position. They can't prove God doesn't exist either, all they can do is state he doesn't, and ask christians if he does. Sounds simple to me. Good spin.

Answer 13

That's not what atheists say at all. If that were the case, then air wouldn't exist. It doesn't exist if there is no evidence to support it, which there isn't.

Answer 14

What really is insulting is you inferring the blind people cannot see. I happen to know a blind girl, and she sees the world better than you or I ever will.

Answer 15

The only thing that is silly is you spouting that rubbish. You know full well what we mean when we say that, and to use blind people as an example is pathetic.

Answer 16

Could be why I've never said that either. In fact, I don't think any atheist said they don't believe because they can't see him. Very simplifying here. Maybe you should rethink what you think.

Answer 17

Atheists do not say that; not even gnostic atheists.



And sight is not the only sense.



Nothing to see here.

Answer 18

Maybe you should realize that blind people can touch hear taste and smell. Now who sounds silly?

Answer 19

Strawman.



Next!

Answer 20

Atheists say: God doesn't exist since I can't see Him.



- Atheists do not say that, brain dead fundies do.

Answer 21

we dont say that . we say we cant see any evidence for him but we can see evidence for other invisible things like wind, electricity etc.

Answer 22

There are other senses apart from sight.

Answer 23

Maybe you should stop misstating other people's positions.