Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
To be fair I – an atheist and skeptic – do not believe in a god or higher power but can not be certain that a god or higher power does not actually exist even though I would personally claim our current scientific understanding to strongly suggest that no such thing exists.
Doesn't that make you agnostic?
Agnostic atheist I guess.
Agnostic atheist or theist are the only intellectually honest positions. Nobody knows for a fact whether gods exist, no matter how much they insist they do.
And it's important to point out that there is a difference between a specific god or any sort of god. I know for a fact that the god of the bible does not exist, because he's a clearly defined character and can therefore be disproved.
Agnosticism refers to knowledge (“I don’t KNOW if gods exist”) while atheism refers to belief (“I don’t BELIEVE that gods exist”).
Any given definition of a god is logically inconsistent.
That's a silly idea. I can definitely come up with a definition of an immeasurable entity that has no powers, no effects and no way of being detected and call that thing "god". it would be unfalsifiable and thus irrelevant to scientific inquiry, but it wouldn't be "logically inconsistent".
Then it isn't a god by any definition.
Let me guess. By your definition only definitions that match your initial statements could possibly be definitions of god?
You're "no true scotsman"-ing this ...
Let's retry: by which reason does any definition of good need to be logically inconsistent?
Nope, just acknowledging that words actually have meaning. You can't claim that something is one thing while having no qualities of that thing; it's like saying you've got water that doesn't contain any oxygen or hydrogen.
Not all "gods" thought history were all powerful, some were very limited in their powers. not all "gods" were abrahameic.
But let's pretend that a good has to be all-powerful.
Then let's posit that there is a god that has created all life on earth by making sure that he preconditions for life on earth were just right and then leaned back and just wachted.
That is powerful enough, right? and while I don't believe that this (or any other) god exists, there is no logical inconsistency here.
Isn't great power a defining property of a god?
I don't know. Our whole existence is resting on the ability to influence our peers. Telling other people what we think they should think and do is kind of part of humanity.