Atheists BTFO

Atheists BTFO

Other urls found in this thread:

undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions
youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems#Second_incompleteness_theorem
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

how did godel prove it?

How will fedoras ever recover?

Fuck stupid fucking christcucks are worst than Muslims. Fucking bitch fuck.

Fedoras BTFO

...

Explain this to a brainlet please

What about faith in logic?

English?

U can't have truf w/o god. That just common sens :)

Btw the only god is my god. Other gods r retarted n not logical

Who says science is incompatible with faith.

Sounds unlogical.
But thanks nip

>christians appeal to logic and mathematics
>everyone else appeals to fee-fees
the christian dark ages was a time when the world's first universities were built in europe and scientific method was enforced by law. our dark ages were better than 20th century communism and 21st century islam combined, kiddo.

Copying from somewhere else.

In order to have a proof, you must have a first principle. Something that is self-evidently true. Whatever you make self-evidently true you hold as God.
If your first principle, or axiom, is not self-evidently true, but relies on another truth, then that is your first principle. And if that relies on another, the chain goes back. And if it links to itself, it become circular logic, and is cut off from any other thought system, and can only be self-reinforced.
"The Bible is 100% true." "How do you know?" "Because I read it in the Bible, and the Bible is 100% true."
There must be something true, you recognize as true, underlying all your logic, that is not reliant on anything else.
"I think, therefore, I am."
Or
"I Am, therefore, I think."
At the bottom of these statements, the proposition of "I am" and "I think." are the self-evident axioms. The first principles.
That is why God's self definition is,
"I Am that I Am."
God Is. The Alpha and the Omega. Whole and complete in Himself.

Is he seriously saying that unless you believe in god, you can't prove things?

I have a pdf explaining it

Godel proved there exist statements that are both true and unprovable in any formal system more complicated than peano arithmetic, not that the concept of proof itself is impossible without an axiom. Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is probably the second most abused popsci victim after quantum physics.

Did you seriously not read the tweet you no ass potato nigger?

>"I think, therefore, I am."
>Or
>"I Am, therefore, I think."
>At the bottom of these statements, the proposition of "I am" and "I think." are the self-evident axioms. The first principles.
>That is why God's self definition is,
>"I Am that I Am."
>God Is. The Alpha and the Omega. Whole and complete in Himself.

Pretty bad reasoning. People have poked holes in Descartes' axiom for many years -- well, and axioms as a whole.

Yes, and he literally says that faith in God is a prerequisite for all proof.

>Corrolary 1: possibly a godlike being exists
Already wrong. Theres no level of logical knot theistfags won't tie themselves up in to justify 'proof' of what they know to be unsubstantiable fantasy.

And I propose that God isn't. Where is your proof that it is?

>Whatever you make self-evidently true you hold as God.

That's quite the assumption.

No he's saying all truths are based on an unprovable axiom. For example, why value logic and reason? What evidence is there that you should value evidence?

Why should you value consistency and reason?

You just kinda should. There's nothing else you can say.

So given that even facts, reason and logic are based on an initial leap of faith, so too is belief in a God.

proof right here

Then why did you make the post? The tweet was a clear cut statement. You're literally a subhuman.

...

The logical absolutes are the all the axioms we need. faith in god is an excuse people give when they dont have a better reason for their beliefs but are afraid to admit it.

This is jibberish. You are the one making a claim that god exists, you need to define specifically what god is and then provide proof.

devil's proof

The proof of no God is all around us.
These people had plenty of faith shoved down there throats. Yet they starve to death.

12 year old Redditors.

Deconstructionism from a soft Leftist Catholic Leaf.

Proof is determined by effect. You want to live in a fantasy world where your proof for everything that happens ever is a Jewish deity then you're just a sick fucked up brat.

>blame god when 90% of Sup Forums supports let them starve mentality

>possibly

There's possibly a pickle on the roof of my house. Saying something is possible (unless demonstrably incorrect, such as saying that I am not myself) is leaving it open. Unless you can prove that God doesn't exist, it is unreasonable to say that there is absolutely no possibility that He does not.

>Already wrong
can you proof that godlike being doesn't exit ?
if you can't this means that p o s i b l y a godlike being exist

I-I-I-It's a test of their faith! All souls must be tested before their time in heaven!

>GOD SOLVE MY PROBLEMS OR I'LL BECOME A FEDORA
Every time.

>it's another religion/god/atheism thread on Sup Forums
we need a new board

>Jap porn poster who loved Jebus

>in every Catholic shill thread


Reminder that Catholic threads are shitskin posters who hate the white race.

>there throats

Fucking genius right here.

That just proves God is white

He's half-right, but goes too far with the conclusion to sound right. I say this as a Christian who converted after listening to a lot of debates over philosophy...

>If I make a fuzzy statement my opponents can't respond

the very fact that you know there is something wrong with the world proves God exists

Allah said he created evil.

Proof of a
Godlike
Pickle

The essential argument is that to come to any conclusion scientifically or objectively or even subjectively you must assume 2 things

1. The universe exists
2. You can learn something about the universe

>he made a typo so he must be stupid and because he is stupid what he says must be wrong.
flawless logic right there.

i go in there to btfo catholics i aint no cathshit

the cure to atheism is anywhere from 2-5 grams of magic mushrooms, it forces rational thought processes

You don't need Goedel to see the inescapable neccesity of accepting gnosis (intuition, "faith", "god", some for of direct knowing). All inference (i.e., reasoning, logic, argumentation) requires certain axioms to be true in order to function. For example identity (x = x) and non-contradiction ( ~ (x ^ ~x) (in english: it's not the case that x and not x)) must be true in order for any inference to work at all. These axioms underlie logic so justifying them via logical argumentation is circular and invalid. The only other option is just to assert that you know them directly to be true. In order to make this assertion you must accept that the power to directly know things to be true (i.e., gnosis, "faith", intuition, etc.) exists.

1. Niggers do not have souls, they are animals.
2. There is no purpose to life without suffering. If everything was without trial, humanity would still be living in mud huts. If we had no need for food, drink, sleep, and were invincible and immortal, we'd probably just sit around and fuck all day. God wants us to prosper. The desire to avoid suffering is one of the basest human instincts. The more we invent, the less we suffer, such as with agriculture, the most important discovery.

>2017
>believes in a magicial sky daddy

Morality doesn't require god. Morality comes from a desire for mutual benefit and an inherent sense of empathy.

It's been well accepted among the scientific community for a very long time that 3 assumptions are necessary to be made.
undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions

you dont need math to prove shit.

randomness here is created with a set and not by absolute nothing.
monkeys with typwriters is a set.

same with this flat earth, you have a set of things to create the reality.

>This is jibberish
Well, yeah, its philosophy, its all nonsense ramblings.

there is a reason your country is being overrun by immigrants

Sorry but there are no arguments against the reasoning and logic of a prime mover, an uncaused cause. There is only problems applying empiricism and evidence to the logic.

There is no argument for specific deities existing, but there can be no denying that the logic in an uncaused cause. It is a thing that can only exist and can't not exist.

I see your reasoning, but the leap of faith needed to value logic, evidence etc. is a lot smaller than the leap of faith to believe in and worship an all powerful deity with a very specific set of rules and moral guidelines which you must follow or else you will go to hell.

where do the inherent sense of empathy and desire for mutual benefit come from?

If he wanted us to prosper, why not just create a world with an abundance of everything? Why have us suffer? There's no point to it.

>Sup Forums will pretend like if they undestand this

This.

Alternatively you take a general position of "I think, but do not know". It's okay to never have absolute certainty.

Did you read my post at all?

Bro...the world does have an abundance of everything we need.

That's his ontological argument. Jordan's talking about his second incompleteness theorem.

I ate 7 and it didn't convert me

But I had a very interesting meeting with an Aztec supernatural presence much older and much more omnipotent than any God invented by jews in the desert

Everything we know about the universe suggests it can and did arise out of perfectly natural causes, no God needed.

the first world he created was without flaw and thus he realized a world without hardship was rejected by humans

56%

yea but who put those elements there to begin with hillary?

That's fine but understand, if you don't justify your axioms via gnosis (a claim to direct knowledge) it's not just "I think but don't know" it's, "I think, but I have literally no argument or reason for thinking so and literally any other thesis is just as justified as anything that I think". Axioms are required for inference and without it you don't get ANY inference. No inferences to "likelihood", or "probable truths", no inference at all.

Living with other humans?

How did you think civilizations worked before Christianity? lmao

not an argument slav

you're conflating denmark with sweden
get your facts straight burger

>simpleton misunderstands tweet
>gets mad at me for criticizing tweet
>I explain tweet to simpleton
>simpleton has a sperg-out calling me subhuman

seems about right

In the first version of Jahweh, his father El created him and gave him Asheera as a wife who would birth humanity, while his brother Marduk went ahead to kill Tiamat in order to create light. Why do you not worship the original Jahweh, but rev. 4.0 circa 7th Century?

Damn, i didnt think a question that is this loaded could even be made.

I'm not an atheist but JP sounds like a sputtering retard here

Yes and a cause that only causes and needs not be caused is a natural cause in our universe. Thus there is a force that has caused all but did not need to be created or caused because there is no possibility in all of possibility for this cause to be caused. It is only uncaused. No probability is all actuality.

There is no argument for Jehova or Allah or Zeus. There is an argument for some sort of force or essence that causes without needed a cause itself.

I mean, why not give everything to us without all the effort.

I did. You said if we were immortal and had everything, we'd just sit around all day. So? At that point we'd have everything we'd ever want. What's the point in creating suffering to make us "prosper" if he could just hand prosperity to us.

...

Niggers do this to themselves.

Theres a reason your country is overrun by niggers

youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg

There's even a big nose on his face, it's meant to to be proof it's all a jewish trick

>pic
How is this not an act of God's love? We need less niggers and more whites. I thank God every day for this. 1488

>why not give everything to us without all the effort.

because what we need more than "stuff" is something to strive for

Can I fuck hookers in the napkin religion?

>you didn't post the one with the gun pointed up his nose

Looks to be a dark dick pointing at the mouth.

see
I recognize that basic assumptions must be made in order to create models that appear to best fit the reality that we probably both experience. I can only ever "prove" things to the extent that they appear to be consistent, and models different from the scientific method don't appear to be as apt to this as it is.

...

since you're interested
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems#Second_incompleteness_theorem

>Whatever you make self-evidently true you hold as God.
Why don't we pray to Self-Evident Truth then?

>2017
>Believes we evolved from apes.

Why do all civilizations have such similar morality then? All cultures have basic rules like don't steal, don't murder, follow all these rules, etc.