Atheists can you prove?

Question

You say that religious minded people cannot prove that God exists. Can you prove to me that you exist? Even if I could physically touch you, my nerve endings could be sending me false signals. This could all be in my head. I could be the only matter in the universe, and you could do nothing to disprove it. Can you prove yourself to me?

Those who called me delusional or crazy etc. Aren't atheists the ones who decided to break away from the conventional thinking of the Church? I choose to break away from the thinkiong that everything I see exists.

Answer 1

This is your A'Level philosophy homework, isn't it?
.

Answer 2

I can't prove that he does not exist. It is lack of proof that causes me to be an Atheist in the first place. It would seem that a God that created the Universe in 6 days, flooded the entire world, created all species from nothing would have left some evidence.. but there seems to be nothing. I can prove using science that many claims in the Bible are incorrect when compared to what science shows, but that is all I can do for you.

Answer 3

Atheists did not break away from anything. Every human being on the planet is born an Atheist. It is only the surrounding society that brainwashes and indoctrinates the weak minded into religion.

Answer 4

Does not compute. Believe me, you would know that I exist if I were beside you (no meanness implied).

On the other hand, as an atheist, I don't feel the need to prove anything. I am that secure.

Answer 5

Moderator: We're here today to debate the hot new topic, evolution versus Intelligent Des---

(Scientist pulls out baseball bat.)

Moderator: Hey, what are you doing?

(Scientist breaks Intelligent Design advocate's kneecap.)

Intelligent Design advocate: YEAAARRRRGGGHHHH! YOU BROKE MY KNEECAP!

Scientist: Perhaps it only appears that I broke your kneecap. Certainly, all the evidence points to the hypothesis I broke your kneecap. For example, your kneecap is broken; it appears to be a fresh wound; and I am holding a baseball bat, which is spattered with your blood. However, a mere preponderance of evidence doesn't mean anything. Perhaps your kneecap was designed that way. Certainly, there are some features of the current situation that are inexplicable according to the "naturalistic" explanation you have just advanced, such as the exact contours of the excruciating pain that you are experiencing right now.

Intelligent Design advocate: AAAAH! THE PAIN!

Scientist: Frankly, I personally find it completely implausible that the random actions of a scientist such as myself could cause pain of this particular kind. I have no precise explanation for why I find this hypothesis implausible --- it just is. Your knee must have been designed that way!

Intelligent Design advocate: YOU BASTARD! YOU KNOW YOU DID IT!

Scientist: I surely do not. How can we know anything for certain? Frankly, I think we should expose people to all points of view. Furthermore, you should really re-examine whether your hypothesis is scientific at all: the breaking of your kneecap happened in the past, so we can't rewind and run it over again, like a laboratory experiment. Even if we could, it wouldn't prove that I broke your kneecap the previous time. Plus, let's not even get into the fact that the entire universe might have just popped into existence right before I said this sentence, with all the evidence of my alleged kneecap-breaking already pre-formed.

Intelligent Design advocate: That's a load of bullshit sophistry! Get me a doctor and a lawyer, not necessarily in that order, and we'll see how that plays in court!

Scientist (turning to audience): And so we see, ladies and gentlemen, when push comes to shove, advocates of Intelligent Design do not actually believe any of the arguments that they profess to believe. When it comes to matters that hit home, they prefer evidence, the scientific method, testable hypotheses, and naturalistic explanations. In fact, they strongly privilege naturalistic explanations over supernatural hocus-pocus or metaphysical wankery. It is only within the reality-distortion field of their ideological crusade that they give credence to the flimsy, ridiculous arguments which we so commonly see on display. I must confess, it kind of felt good, for once, to be the one spouting free-form bullshit; it's so terribly easy and relaxing, compared to marshaling rigorous arguments backed up by empirical evidence. But I fear that if I were to continue, then it would be habit-forming, and bad for my soul. Therefore, I bid you adieu.

Answer 6

At least, the assumption that I exist does not directly lead to self-contradictions, therefore I take it for valid. I even believe that you exist because it seems to fit in. But the assumption that there is an omnipresent omniscient all-powerful all-benign creator entity out there is so absurd and self-contradicting and incompatible with physical reality that I can reject it outright.

Answer 7

I respond to your message. Everyone else can see that I responded, so I am not some figment of your imagination that would require you to prove anything. And if you believe that you are the onlything that exists and everyone else is actually part of some grand dellusion then the question is moot.

Answer 8

There's the problem with ALL perception. Nothing we perceive, if we in fact even exist, can be proven. It is all illusion and as such doesn't make the least bit of difference. All we can do is attempt to make the most of it for as long as it persists.

Answer 9

that question makes no sense at all. your whole argument is structured illogically, "Even if I could physically touch you, my nerve endings could be sending me false signals. This could all be in my head" "In my head", that means you do exist etc etc, eh Ive lost the desire to go on

Answer 10

maybe we are all dreaming you up

or then again you are dreaming us all up

philosophy questions should stay in the philosophy section

people, both me and you are real as we can be defined in terms of science, that is we can be "detected" both by each other and by scientific instruments and also quantified in terms of measurements like our mass and height.

Nobody can prove god exists yet by these scientific ways yet.

Answer 11

So let's say I except a lower standard of proof than you do, and actually believe in an objective reality. I would except creditable objective proof of your existence, or God's , for that matter.