Personally, I just prefer it. I get a lot more anxious considering that death is the end, given how it could come at any moment. I prefer to think it's not. Since I was raised with the alternative being that God exists, I go with that.
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
69 points (83.5% liked)
Ask Lemmy
28537 readers
1072 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Mountains exist.
Weirdest would have to be that miracles were actively occuring at their Penacostal church. On the one hand, if that were true it would be strong evidence for a god. On the other hand, I don't believe the claim is true.
A lot of believers point towards the fine-tuning argument. It's "the god of the gaps." Essentially, the argument boils down to the claim that since we don't know why various laws and properties of nature and physics are the way they are, there must of have been a god that set them. Like many theist arguments, it falls apart when you consider that the lack of an alternate explanation doesn't mean that there is no alternate explanation and that the believing explanation has to be correct.
As an atheist, I think the strongest argument for god is the moral argument. It's simple. For objective morality to exist, there must be an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-moral being capable of establishing it (that is, a god). Objective morality exists, so God exists.
It's easy to look at that and say "Well, objective morality doesn't exist. End of story!" I think there is a decent argument that can be made for the existence of objective morality, though I don't believe in it. Still, do I not believe in god because I think objective morality doesn't exist, or do I think objective morality doesn't exist because I don't believe in god? If I'm being honest, it's more the latter than the former, and that's not really a great way to come to the conclusion.
Objective morality doesn't exist. Even if it did that doesn't necessitate a God. Let's use colors for a stand-in to morality, now you have two colorblind people arguing whether objective color truly exist, one might say that his holy book says that God gave colors and an apple is red, while the other might say that there's no God and apples are green. They're both (at least about the color part) right (or wrong depending on how you want to look at it), and objective color still exists regardless of it without the need for any God to have created it. In the same way it's possible for objective morality to exist without the requirement of a creator, if it is objective it should be demonstrably so, otherwise it's subjective. In our color example the colorblind people can argue all they want, but if you use an equipment to measure the light waves you'll have an objective answer for the wavelength of the apple, they might disagree on what that wavelength is (the subjective part) but they agree on the value (the objective part). If something similar could be achieved for morality it would imply the existence of an objective morality (regardless of God) but since we can't then no objective morality exists.
A basis for morality just naturally follows from the nature of being a living organism.
The sun rose today.