Critical thinking on the existence of God

Forums: Religion, Philosophy, God, Atheism, Atheists
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I have exchanged thoughts with atheists over the existence of God, and I notice all the time that they are not into critical thinking on the issue of God existing or not.

So, let me see whether I can succeed in this thread to see atheists engage in critical thinking on the issue God exists or not.

First, in critical thinking a person must know what is the concept of the thing he is talking about, otherwise he would be talking in effect nonsense.

Wherefore to be into critical thinking on the issue of God existing or not, we must all first work to come to concurrence on the concept of God.

As I am the initiator of this thread, allow me to present my concept of God, namely:

God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

I invite posters here to also present their concepts of God, then we will work together to come to concurrence on the concept of God; and from there we will exchange thoughts as to also come to the conclusion that God exists or not, God as known according to the concept we will have concurred on.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 27 • Views: 35,899 • Replies: 446

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

I invite posters here to also present their concepts of God, then we will work together to come to concurrence on the concept of God; and from there we will exchange thoughts as to also come to the conclusion that God exists or not, God as known according to the concept we will have concurred on.

I don't own a concept of the divine. Sometimes I try to understand what other people mean or have meant by it.

5000 years ago, Central Asia. An example of a divinity is the sun. The sun exists, though I wouldn't appeal to it for help if things are crappy. So I think some of their ideas about the sun were wrong. Contemporary physics doesn't have it all figured out, so it's possible that the same is true of me.

Nevertheless, I know the sun exists. What some people have called "god" exists.

Your definition is: "God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning." You define "God" as a cause and a governor.

Causes exist. We often think in terms of governance, although it's sometimes wise to be careful with that sort of thinking. But does it make sense to say the universe had a cause? If I say that, I seem to have redefined "universe" as something less than everything.

How do you define "universe?"

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

This has been asked before.

http://able2know.org/topic/48210-1

And that's not the only thread asking the same question. You will find an endless number of variations on what "God" is. So I doubt you will ever reach a consensus from which to base a discussion.

2 Replies

Thanks Tuna for your reply.

You see, the word God is used everywhere, so you must have some inkling of the meaning of the word, otherwise how can you be reading intelligently on what people are writing and talking about and having the word God in their communication?

Take this text from the Declaration of Independence of America:

Quote:

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms [etc.].
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

So, critical thinking requires among persons who want to exchange thoughts on the existence of God, that they concur on the concept of God, like as it is used in the Declaration of Independence of America.

Do you know what God, in concept that is, they the framers of the declaration are talking about?

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

You see, the word God is used everywhere, so you must have some inkling of the meaning of the word, otherwise how can you be reading intelligently on what people are writing and talking about and having the word God in their communication?

Sometimes it's obvious what people mean by it. Sometimes you have to do a little research to discover what's intended.

Quote:

So, critical thinking requires among persons who want to exchange thoughts on the existence of God, that they concur on the concept of God, like as it is used in the Declaration of Independence of America.

Do you know what God, in concept that is, they the framers of the declaration are talking about?

Sort of. The guy who wrote it is believed to have been an animist.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

And a few months later there was this

0 Replies

Thanks Tuna for your reply.

You do know what the framers of the US independence declaration is talking about with their use of the words: God and creator.

So, here is again my concept of God:

Creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

I like very much to exchange thoughts with you on your text below:

Quote:

Your [my] definition is: "God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning." You define "God" as a cause and a governor.

Causes exist. We often think in terms of governance, although it's sometimes wise to be careful with that sort of thinking. But does it make sense to say the universe had a cause? If I say that, I seem to have redefined "universe" as something less than everything.

How do you define "universe?"

You seem to be concerned with cause and universe; and forgive me, but you say that I am redefining universe so that it is lesser than it should be, owing to my assigning a cause to the universe.

Correct me if I get you wrong.

Let us employ critical thinking, okay?

The way I see, you do have in your mental database the concept of God as the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

No, I am not binding you to accept the concept as a valid concept, just that you do have it in your mental database, so that if you are asked to choose which of two words represents some superior entity: (1) God, (2) guy, you will correctly point to (1) God.

Of course you don't accept the reality represented by me with the word God.

Now, let us put our minds together to talk about what is a cause, and later whether the universe having a cause makes it less of a universe than it is according to you actually existing.

Here is my concept of cause: in the most expansive reach of the word cause, it is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of another thing.

When you write to reply to me, tell me what is a cause, the concept of that is, in your stock knowledge.

And yes, you want me to give my definition of the universe.

Here, prescinding from my knowledge that God exists, I will define the universe as in its most expansive reach, the whole sum and totality of existence, period.

May I invite you when you write in reply to this post, to tell me what is your concept of cause, and also of universe.

Forgive me, here again are my concepts of cause and of universe:

Cause: in the most expansive reach of the word cause, it is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of another thing.

Universe, [prescinding from my knowledge of God] in the most broad span of the word, everything at all that exists, period.

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

You do know what the framers of the US independence declaration is talking about with their use of the words: God and creator.

A rule of critical thinking: "Garbage in, garbage out."

The saying means that if you start with erroneous information, no matter how wonderfully logical you may be, you're likely to come to wrong conclusions.

So in regard to the intentions of the writer and editors of the Declaration (we don't usually call them "framers"), application of the GIGO rule would involve looking into it. Research it. Read a book about it.

Who wrote it? What was this person's outlook on the nature of reality? Why does he emphasize the word "nature?"

I invite you to answer these questions based on the best information available to you. If you answer it without having done that, you could scarcely be in a position to teach others to think critically.

Quote:

Cause: in the most expansive reach of the word cause, it is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of another thing.

Universe, [prescinding from my knowledge of God] in the most broad span of the word, everything at all that exists, period.

I spy a contradiction. How do you address this?

0 Replies

@Susmariosep,

In order to answer this question, I need you to be more specific on your definition of God.

Does your definition of God have to be a sentient being, or could god be a mathematical formula? Could god be be the equivalent to a chemical reaction (i.e. a random arrangement of subatomic particles and energy) ... something that just happens without having any self-awareness.

If we are only talking about a sentient God with his own thoughts and feelings, then this will be a much different discussion.

I could believe that there is a mathematical formula behind the way the universe has developed. But a sentient creator who set things up on purpose is a little more difficult to accept rationally.

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

The God of the Declaration of Independence is certainly a myth.

In reality Humans have no rights. The writers of the declaration were using the mythology of the time to invent rights that humans had never had before.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

I could believe that there is a mathematical formula behind the way the universe has developed.

I'll bet you could, Max!

Would you have any belief about where that math formula came from? How it was developed? How it happened to exist, and rule the universe?

0 Replies

Well, Tuna, for you the declaration of independence of the USA is an example of garbage in garbage out.

That is not any instance of critical thinking at all, and not an example either of intelligent and respectful posting.

As regards my concept of God, the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning, that is already the most essential role of God that man can think about to size up God.

If you want to add something more to that concept, then you are not into critical thinking but into trivialities.

Critical thinking means that the reasoning mind goes to the very essence of a thing that makes it of any ultimate worth in the world of existence.

Let us all now go to serious intelligent and of course respectful exchange, let us ask ourselves this question, what is it to prove on critical thinking that something exists in reality.

The objects we want to prove to be existing are in very broad division: (1) things which are within our sense access, like we can see it, hear it, touch it, taste it, and also smell it, and (2) things which we cannot apply our senses to access them, but we have a mind which can reason from truths and facts and logic to come to their existence, because they are connected to the things we have sense access to.

There, that is how we prove the existence of something, by sense access in regard to things which are within our sense reach, and as regards things beyond our sense contact, by reasoning from their connection to things within our sense access.

Here I go, to prove God exists.

First, as I have said already several times, we must have a concept of the thing we want prove existing or not existing.

Take this concept of God as creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning, that is a critical concept of God, critical because it is not frivolous; and that is why some folks not accustomed to critical thinking want to trivialize the concept of God, making it frivolous, by calling God a flying spaghetti monster.

The reason is because they have no genuine ground to deny the existence of a creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning, so the only reaction they can think of -- if think is the appropriate word at all, they try to make fun of the name of God.

There is a long thread at the start of the forums, on intelligent and respectful exchange, let us everyone be intelligent and respectful, okay.

I said that for myself and I hope it is the same also for every intelligent and respectful seeker of knowledge, a cause in the broadest expanse of the word is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of something else.

And I also said that for me taking myself as still without knowledge of God existing, the universe is the whole sum totality of existence.

Dear readers and posters here, how do I go about proving that God exists as the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning?

Let me go to science, and first of course let us all remind ourselves that science is a discipline grounded on critical thinking, i.e., grounded on truths, facts, and logic.

Science tells us that the universe began to exist some 13.7 billion years ago, and logic tells us that everything with a beginning has need of a cause: so, the universe has a cause.

Next, as the universe is still existing and going about all its vicissitudes faithfully -- that is a fact, logic tells us that the cause which brings it to existence is also the agent operating it to keep it in existence and in active status.

That in sum is the critical thinking that proves the existence of God as the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

That in sum is the critical thinking that proves the existence of God as the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

That is your notion of "critical thinking on the existence of God?"

You're just pulling our legs...right?

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

... a cause in the broadest expanse of the word is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of something else.

... the universe is the whole sum totality of existence.

Your conception of God contains a contradiction.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Quote:

And that's not the only thread asking the same question. You will find an endless number of variations on what "God" is. So I doubt you will ever reach a consensus from which to base a discussion.

Consensus - Not to be disrespectful but - Pffft! What would that possibly have to do with the possible existence of God (or anything else?)

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, you say:

Quote:

@Susmariosep,

Quote:
From Susmariosep

That in sum is the critical thinking that proves the existence of God as the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

That is your notion of "critical thinking on the existence of God?"

You're just pulling our legs...right?

Thanks for your reaction.

Please present to readers what you see in my proof to be uncritical thinking.

Otherwise you do not know that you are into gratuitous talk without any support on truths, facts, and logic.

First tell me, how do you prove that you have a nose, to yourself and to others, and how do you prove to yourself and to others that you came from human forebears.

If you cannot prove the two things above, then I will have to beg for your indulgence as I will no longer deal with you: because I can see in you a subject that is bereft of exchange that is intelligent and respectful.

0 Replies

@Tuna,

Tuna says:

Quote:

@Susmariosep,

Quote:
... a cause in the broadest expanse of the word is anything at all which contributes in any way to the existence of something else.
... the universe is the whole sum totality of existence.

Your conception of God contains a contradiction.

Dear Tuna [an aside, are you she or he, please?] you forgot to point out where in my concept of God, namely: God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning, is the contradiction?

I am happy for us both, that you have returned to intelligent and respectful posting.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot says:

Quote:

@rosborne979,

Quote:
And that's not the only thread asking the same question. You will find an endless number of variations on what "God" is. So I doubt you will ever reach a consensus from which to base a discussion.

Consensus - Not to be disrespectful but - Pffft! What would that possibly have to do with the possible existence of God (or anything else?)

Dear everyone, there need not be an endless search for the concept of God, if people with the faculty of reasoning will just employ the faculty in a critical manner by doing critical thinking.

Critical thinking consists in reasoning on truths, facts, and logic to come to the settlement of an issue.

The issue at present is the concept of God, whose concept of God is to be accepted in the debate on His existence, namely, the question whether God exists or not, as corresponding to the mutually accepted concept of God.

Here is my concept of God as one who knows God exists from my exercise of critical thinking, namely:

God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and of everything with a beginning.

Now, dear atheist folks, if you have a concept of God, please present it here, otherwise as you are into denying God exists, I invite you to accept for a concept, my concept of God.

If you will not accept my concept of God and you have no concept of God, then it is obvious as you are intelligent and hopefully respectful in the exchange of thoughts among fellow seekers of knowledge, you have to admit that you are talking nonsense: because as you don't have any concept at all of God, not from yourself and not from your respondent party, me, in the exchange, you are talking without knowing what you are talking about, that is talking nonsense; and you will realize your non-epistemological* condition, as soon as you choose to exercise intelligence by doing critical thinking, using your brain cells following the path of truths, facts, and logic.

Do right by this forum, produce your concept of God or accept my concept of God, otherwise you are a discredit to this forum.

*Epistemological, adjective, having to do with the discipline of attaining valid knowledge, cf. Merriam-Webster:

epistemology: the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epistemological

0 Replies

@Susmariosep,

Quote:

Dear Tuna [an aside, are you she or he, please?]

Oh, you're a ******* troll. Great.

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

I define God by his name; in Hebrew, the tetragrammaton יהוה , when transliterated, means "He who causes to become". When I reflect on it, I see it as a declaration of his invincible purpose. So, if the bible is correct, the future He offered to Adam and Eve has not been abandoned.

Just my opinion, of course. I've been wrong before.

1 Reply

Critical thinking on the existence of God

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know