English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This can apply to:
God
Ghosts
Paris Hilton uttering something intelligent
Aliens


Just curious. :) Not trying to pick a fight, though my wording comes off that way because I'm being lazy.

2007-04-29 15:14:05 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Psychology

P.S. I'm not religious, so this is not an attempt to prove my religious beliefs. Or maybe it is because I'm agnostic. I don't know (truly the agnostic).

2007-04-29 15:14:47 · update #1

maisie . . . you're kind of special.

There's a difference between the abstract and the supernatural.

2007-05-01 09:07:38 · update #2

9 answers

Logic and Statistics are popular.

Statistics as applied to aliens: The universe is infinite. The probability that Life evolved (or alternatively was placed by God) only on this planet is statistically zero. Time is also infinite. The probability that one or more races (ours, perhaps) will visit other inhabited planets is statistically 100%.

Of course, the odds of that happening during our own lifetimes is also nearly zero.

Logic and God: The Theory of Evolution tells us that Natural Selection makes things that work. Nothing in nature has no purpose. Given that some animals are blind, and some monochromatic, it's obvious that color serves no actual purpose in nature. Yet, it exists. It is purely decorative. Evolution doesn't explain color at all.

People believe in ghosts simply because the mind abhors a vaccuum. They can't figure out what happens to their persona when they die, so assume it continues to exist, and ghosts support the theory, so they believe it.

I not only don't believe in Paris Hilton uttering something intelligent, I don't even believe in the existence of anyone that finds this a plausible event.

2007-04-29 15:28:52 · answer #1 · answered by open4one 7 · 1 0

sure, atheist is a thought... in a feeling... besides the indisputable fact that, this is not any longer a appropriate thought yet basically the rejection of the claims made via theists. you assert which you're agnostic which might make you an atheist via default. while you're asked in case you have faith in god and your answer is something yet "sure," then you definitely're an atheist considering you do no longer carry the effective thought in a deity. Atheism/theist consult from what you have faith and agnosticism/gnosticism consult from what you comprehend and that they are no longer mutually unique. you will possibly be an agnostic/theist, a gnostic/theist, an agnostic/atheist, or a gnostic/atheist. this is the version between atheists and theists: the version between the two is that theists are those making a declare and atheists are those rejecting the declare. the burden of info falls on the single making the declare. If theists are claiming to have faith in a god that exists, then this is their activity for instance the god that they are claiming in the event that they assume every physique else to have faith. Atheists purely look on the circumstances made via theists and reject it simply by shortcoming of info. the ultimate analogy i've got heard of is to check the area to the courtroom of regulation: If somebody is on trial, they are the two responsible or harmless. besides the indisputable fact that, the sole 2 verdicts we evaluate are "responsible" and "no longer responsible." Innocence isn't addressed and purely simply by fact the jury supplies a verdict of "no longer responsible" does not inevitably advise they suspect the defendant is "harmless." they might desire to evaluate if the info is physically powerful sufficient to rule a "responsible" verdict and if no longer, the default place is "no longer responsible." The default place on any declare would desire to be DISBELIEF until eventually the declare is generic to be actual. Atheism is the "no longer responsible." we don't declare god does not exist. We purely reject all the god claims that have been posited. we don't would desire to tutor god does not exist except we make the declare that god does not exist. God ok would exist yet until eventually the info helps the declare, we can't have faith.

2016-10-04 02:55:18 · answer #2 · answered by durrell 4 · 0 0

Hummm... the question might be better asked by this:
How you can hold the belief that something DOES exist even if you haven't seen it?

LOL On the Paris Hilton thing
People will say "They just know" about god.
Ghosts & Aliens... I have seen ghosts... and to believe that we are the only people in the universe is crazy... The FSM has invented much more than us.

2007-04-29 15:23:36 · answer #3 · answered by moon_fariey 3 · 0 1

Because in the case of God and ghosts, it makes sense. Paris could randomly say something smart. Maybe. Aliens...it's a big universe. It can't ALL be just for us.

2007-04-29 15:42:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

CRIKY KID! Who are you apologizing to anyway???


Personally, I can't hold the belief that someBODY doesn't exist, just because I have never SEEN them. Which would include Abraham Lincoln, Johnny Cash hehe and YOU! ya tink?

2007-04-29 15:40:59 · answer #5 · answered by ravin_lunatic 6 · 0 0

I believe in everything factual and can be prove. God, religion, ghost, supernatural is part of things that i believe. aight

2007-04-29 15:19:21 · answer #6 · answered by Danni 2 · 0 0

seeing is believing

2007-04-29 15:28:14 · answer #7 · answered by pirate00girl 6 · 0 0

you have never ending hope and some wishful thinking

2007-04-29 15:16:42 · answer #8 · answered by ♪♫viva la vida♫♪ 4 · 0 0

Well, do you believe in love? You can't see that.

My point exactly.

2007-04-29 15:17:23 · answer #9 · answered by maisie24 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers