Forums - Politics Discussion - Is God's existence objectively verifiable?

Well, is it objectively verifiable?

Yes 57 15.20%
 
Not Sure 20 5.33%
 
No 244 65.07%
 
What's objective mean? 16 4.27%
 
Results 38 10.13%
 
Total:375
RadiantDanceMachine said:

Now contrast this with the objective - that which is not subject to interpretation. For example, suppose I had filmed the 9/11 terror attacks. No one can argue that two planes did not collide with the WTC because it's right there on video. (ignoring the possibility of doctored videos, which can be detected anyway)

You either don't understand what objectivity is or you're projecting your own definition of it to shape the discussion on your terms.

Everything observed is subject to interpretation. Someone has to observe it and interpret it to be able to communicate it, and senses are not quite "not subjective" to be able to make such a claim that if you don't see it as I do, then you're seeing it wrong. If you did not learn this in your philosophy class; knowledge, the information you use to form any idea, is just memories. In terms of certainty, you don't really "know" anything. You just remember how you experienced it. Convention of knowledge just places your experiences in context in the enviornment you're in, for which it's helpful to understand and predict scenarios within that environment, but it doesn't make that knowledge any less "true" or "false". This applies to every kind of knowledge, including scientific knowledge which is ever changing and evolving.

Saying that you can observe objectively is a sign that you might be an intstrumentalist, which, ironically is a philosophy that is based off empiricism; the philosophy of "experiencing". But either way, even if you're an instrumentalist, you can claim all you want that you can observe objectively, but you can't prove it. Paradox much.

With that out of the way; as of now, no. If conventionalism says there is no observable proof of any god, then it can't be "objectively" verifiable.

But that's very positivist of me, though. I like the more open minded and yet secular answer; given we think the universe is infinite (observably) and the human understanding of quantum mechanics (and for which its mechanical wave function is actually being debated for ontological attribution, lol), I think yes. Everything that can happen has already happened somewhere.

A better question, IMO, is:

Is God's inexistence objectively verifiable?



Around the Network
Attiq said:

 

Still doing things during my life while believing in God, His Son and The Holy Spirit. What will you be doing when your dead?

 

Either ashes in a vase or rotting in the ground, same as you and everyone else.

I do envy the comfort that the religious can take in the idea of an afterlife (and I'm sure I'll want to believe in one near the end) but it's not really a compelling reason for me to have faith in a belief system. Recently, I've come to realize that death is the same state of non-existence I had before birth. Makes it a tad less terrifying, I guess.



jonathanalis said:
if so, the word faith would have no meaning.

 


Faith might be very helpful in a psychological way. As long as your believes don't go in the wrong direction.



The real question is: why do people choose to shower such a being with worship?
If this being has the power to create the universe, and those living within it, surely this being could do more to look after its creation. However, this is not the case. This being is more like a deadbeat parent whom does not look after their kids. This being has abandoned its children yet fully expects their worship.

The children look up to this being and wonder why they must thank such a being for the bone cancer it has left them with. Fundamentalists will defend this beings existence and label it the embodiment of all and the eternal example of morality.

The morality of this being is flawed. It expects praise, yet there are people who are homeless, starving, riddled with disease. This does not necessarily apply to adults, children too. There is an insect that has no single purpose but to burrow into the eyes of children. It is something that does not need to exist.
Why should people respect a god that has created so much evil, and so much corruption? This being that deserves no respect begs for the praise of its creations. If you do not thank this being, it will force you into hell. An eternity of misery. Your malevolent being is selfish and sadistic.

Luckily there is no evidence that such a being exists.



Humans will not know why, but rather how. This is the reason for the existence of science. As long as we exist science will prevail. As long as we allow our imaginations to trump our scientific endeavors there will always be a god concept rather than a god that is present to us all at once. Until said god shows up the concept prevails.



Around the Network

There's no proof confirming or denying his existence. So let people believe in what they want to believe in.

That's my take on it anyway.
As long as people don't try to shove their religion down my throat, I respect anyone's beliefs.



[Switch Friend code: 3909-3991-4970]

[Xbox Live: JissuWolfe]

[PSN: Jissu]

I´d ask differently.... Is God's non-existence objectively verifiable?

God is not part of the physical world. There´s no physical way of verify the existence of something that´s not physical..... or its non-existence.
Faith is not related to the things we can see or feel by any of our body senses, but rather about things that transcend the very human nature.

That said.... I´d say that there´s no sense in trying to "prove" or "verify" things that can only be only achieved by faith. And faith is something very, very personal. Or you have it, or you don´t have it.

I think this topic has been discussed a lot in these forums, hasn´t it ?



Rogerioandrade said:
I´d ask differently.... Is God's non-existence objectively verifiable?

God is not part of the physical world. There´s no physical way of verify the existence of something that´s not physical..... or its non-existence.
Faith is not related to the things we can see or feel by any of our body senses, but rather about things that transcend the very human nature.

That said.... I´d say that there´s no sense in trying to "prove" or "verify" things that can only be only achieved by faith. And faith is something very, very personal. Or you have it, or you don´t have it.

I think this topic has been discussed a lot in these forums, hasn´t it ?

That's a pretty interesting point of view you bring, even if it has already been brought at this thread. Everyone is hellbent on trying to prove to the rest on how God's existence cannot be proven and how faith is irrelevant in any aspect. It's true that faith has to do with the things we don't see, hence why some people find the concept absurd and ridiculize it, demeaning the personal experiences people have had with faith in the name of evidence and facts. But what can you do?

I agree that this topic has been discussed to death on VGC before, and it's a topic I try to stay away from.





Attiq said:

 

Still doing things during my life while believing in God, His Son and The Holy Spirit. What will you be doing when your dead?

 

You say this as if people have a choice. I can't just say "I believe" and make myself believe. Could you choose to beleive in Zeus and do it earnestly? How about invisible unicorns, or that th earth is flat?



*sigh*

Why is it that atheists care about religion more than I (a religious person) do?

No. You have to have faith. no proof.



Currently own:

 

  • Ps4

 

Currently playing: Witcher 3, Walking Dead S1/2, GTA5, Dying Light, Tomb Raider Remaster, MGS Ground Zeros