“God does not exist” vs. “God probably does not exist”
Posted on | November 7, 2009 | 3 Comments
Is it more appropriate to say “God does not exist” or “God most probably does not exist”, and why?
I am an atheist. I do not believe in a God, for similar reasons as to why I do not believe in Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Boogey Man, and other such imaginative creatures created by my fellow man to induct morale, or Order. I am a skeptic. I see nothing as true if I am not presented with some evidence of its truth.
That’s going to be a key word in this post, “truth.” There are two truths in which I will speak of.
1) Relative truth
2) Absolute truth
Relative truths are the truths that are only true because we share a common perception of it. For example, we share the observation of light, so we can all agree that it exists. If, however, man never had eyes, or any tools to sense what we call light, then light would not exist relatively, though it COULD very well exist absolutely. In summary, just because we can’t sense or observe it, does not mean it absolutely does not exists. And similarly, because we can sense or observe it doesn’t mean it does exist!
So an absolute truth would be something that exists, whether we perceive it or not. However, even what we perceive may not be absolutely true. Let me explain.
Pretend it is very late in the night, and you are 5 years old. There’s a dark shadow that looks like a hand swaying back and forth on your window. In sync with the swaying of this hand there is a loud scraping noise, like nails on glass. There’s also a light moaning noise coming from the creature that you see at your window. This happens night after night after night, and in those moments, your perception of what is happening tells you there is an unknown creature at your window, and you become frightened and want to retreat. However, the truth is, the wind is just pushing a branch up against your window. There’s nothing to be threatened by, there’s no creature stalking you, and certainly you’ve allowed your perception to trick you.
This observation can be proven to be false through investigation, because you can show with high certainty what was making the noise and the hand-like shadow was in fact the tree.
We would have to be ignorant to believe that some of the things we perceive even today in our adult or elder ages are absolute truth, even if we’ve seen them over and over and over again, to accept anything as more than relative truth would require some ignorance. I’m willing to take that argument even as far as a pretty convincing concept: gravity. We can demonstrate that masses are attracted to each other, and that larger masses have more force than smaller masses, over and over and over again, but could we say with 100% certainty that this is true?
Well, with relative truth, yes we can. All who can observe this will say it is true, because that’s what truth is. Truth is anything we can perceive, anything we can show others.
So, back to our original question about whether we could say “God does not exist” vs. “God probably does not exist”.
Well, it was argued to me that it is the same thing as saying “There is 1 apple on the table” vs. “There is probably 1 apple on the table” when clearly, there is just 1 apple on the table. I disagree with this argument, and this is why.
There being 1 apple on the table is a) dependent on our ability to perceive (see, touch, feel, taste, smell…) and b) is mutually exclusive from the idea that there is NOT 1 apple on the table. In other words, we cannot have 1 apple AND NO apples on the table, nor 1 apple AND many apples. (This is known as a paradox)
My stance would be, that since the two are mutually exclusive, if you are able to prove to me by means of our shared perceptions that either way is true, or false, you could say with relative certainty that “there IS 1 apple on the table” or “there IS NOT 1 apple on the table”, and that would be the relative truth, and logically sound.
However, if given a situation where your claim is NOT mutually exclusive of the statement you are trying to prove wrong, should you in fact say “there is probably” or “there is probably not” … “a god” or “a dead cat in the box” or something of that sort.
My stance: it’s more correct to say “probably” when you have no evidence supporting your argument or the mutually exclusive argument.
One cannot prove that God does not exist. That does not mean we can’t say he probably doesn’t, but still, you cannot prove with 100% certainty that he does not exist, for the same reason that Russel can not prove to you that there is no “too small to be seen” teapot floating around in space.
I’ve been argued that there is very strong evidence that God does not exist, but really what is being said is that there is very strong evidence that the stories of the bible are wrong. You see? And the thing is, even if we were to prove every story in the bible to be wrong, that would not disprove a God’s existance. To better clarify this, consider the following:
You are my friend. You exist, and plenty of people know you exist. What if, from this day on, we tell false stories of you. Every story ever told of you from this point on is wrong in its entirety, except for the 1 fact that you existed. People of the future may prove every one of the stories wrong, and because of it, have very strong doubts in your existence, but truth is, you did exist. The people of the future would be wrong if they pronounced that you “did not exist.” Being able to prove, or show strong evidence against, the stories of the bible, is NOT mutually exclusive to the idea that a God exists, it merely supports that a God as described in the stories does not.
Also, let me point out, that having strong supporting evidence of things like evolution, the big bang, and how the earth is older than 6000 years also is not mutually exclusive to the idea that a God exists, so therefore, even in relative truth, saying “God does not exist” is not the same as saying “There is not 1 apple on the table” because the counter argument is not, and I hope the prior has shown this, mutually exclusive.
I am not arguing that a God exists, I am merely arguing that he most probably does not, and only until we can all agree on that statement as a relative truth (which we clearly do not in this world), it should be stated “God probably does not exist”.
Now, should it be said “God probably does exist”? That, my friends, is a whole other argument.
Sell your child!
Posted on | October 28, 2009 | No Comments
Landover Baptist Church wrote an article on their site, presumably many years back since the article mentions things about how Bush needs to fix what Clinton messed up and the such, that is announcing their program which would allow parents to sell their children to the church.
Source: http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0203/childpurchase.html
LOL. I read this, and just thought “WHAT THE F**K”… but then I did some research. The general opinion seems to be that this site is entirely a joke, a hoax.. a parody of the various religious beliefs out there. Thank God it’s a joke. (Didn’t see that pun coming, did ya) because I would seriously do some major emailing about the matter. It’s funny, because its not so hard to believe that a radical christian group would do such things. “Sell your children to us, give them a better home, give your child the gift of God in their backyard.”
Anyway, I received the link in a tweet today, and ‘mah source’ is right, the whole site is ri-dic-u-lous. They have advertisements for “what-would-Jesus-do?” thongs! >_<
And get a laugh out of one of their recent headlines: Are the Sneaky Creatures in “Where the Wild Things Are,” Trying to Teach Our Children How to Masturbate? HAHA! Who needs to be taught? … Seriously.
So this site is to religion as the Onion is to news. 
Great find M.
Man I love my friends.
The proof of God’s existance
Posted on | October 28, 2009 | No Comments
Untitled
Posted on | October 27, 2009 | 2 Comments
This is dedicated to all my friends in NY, who I miss very much:
A man I know, has few good friends.
Friends, he can count only on one hand (maybe two),
But he considers himself lucky,
because even in bumfuck Kentucky,
His friends don’t forget his name.
And thanks for that 
A few things
Posted on | October 25, 2009 | No Comments
This was a long week. Work kept me busy– I think I stayed late 4 out of the 5 work days. I’m getting a lot done over at NKU, it’s refreshing when looking back on it.
But the weekend wasn’t so refreshing. A professor I had, Dr. Ricky Glass, passed away. I’m really saddened by it. Not because I had such a tight bond with him, because I’d be lying if I told you I did. I’m saddened because, well, he was my teacher, and the role of a teacher is just so important to me, that losing any of them feels strange. Every teacher you’ve ever had in some way has shaped who you are– as little of a contribution as it may be, that’s important to think about. I had taken a C programming course of his, and everything I know about pointer arithmetic that I know today, was because of him (which is actually quite important in what I’m doing for work nowadays). Again, as little of a contribution as that may be, its one of the building blocks that makes up me, John, the programmer, the puzzle solver– and like I thank every person who has taught me anything, I thank him.
I know people who, when Dr. Glass passed away, lost more than just a teacher. They lost a colleague, a friend, a mentor.. I can’t even begin to imagine how they feel. My heart goes out to each and every one of them, and I wish there was more I could do to support them through this.
Well, I think I just wanted to get a little of that off my chest. Other than this sad news, not much else is going on, and hopefully things will look up from here soon.
Practicing my E chord
Posted on | October 17, 2009 | No Comments
Just practicing my E chord on guitar. I don’t get to practice much, and man do my fingers still hurt… but this is composed of the E chord and, er, the open-strings-chord o.O
Nothing spectacular, just sharing my practicing experience with you:
Well now, this guy can draw
Posted on | October 3, 2009 | No Comments
So I’ve come across this YouTuber who does celebrity portraits, and I have to say, he’s QUITE good. After watching a few of his videos, I checked out his DeviantArt, and I see him and I have similar taste in TV (Heroes, Lost).. strangely, he (the artist) kind of looks and speaks like Adam from heroes (you know, the guy who never ages. The guy that Hiro meets when he traveled REALLY far back in time)
Anyway, let the video speak for itself: (Him drawing John Locke, from Lost)
and check out his prints on DeviantArt
Stop-motion graffiti
Posted on | September 26, 2009 | No Comments
This is such an awesome video. Part of me contemplates if this is CG, but even if it is, the concept is amazing. I do feel bad for all the people’s work he’d painted over, ha. I wonder how this guy got away with doing all this…
Check it out:
If I…
Posted on | September 24, 2009 | No Comments
Demetri Martin, a very clever comedian in my humble opinion, did a special a while back called “if i”. It’s very good, and very motivational (for me anyhow.) My nerd friends will love this. The rest of you will MAYBE like it, but I say give it a shot. I went through the “work” of embedding all 6 parts of the special to this page, so ENJOY:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
Part 6:
Now go make your own weekly organizer w/ a point system. Or a 3d crossword puzzle if you’re savvy enough.
This fat flamboyant is proud of being fat and flamboyant
Posted on | September 13, 2009 | 4 Comments
This made me crack up! I give him lots of credit for being courageous enough to be such a fool on the internet, and we should thank him for the few minutes of “entertainment”. (Did I spell that right, or is it spelled: A-W-K-W-A-R-D-N-E-S-S ??)
Anyway. Laugh it up:
You can check out more of his videos at: http://www.youtube.com/user/fatboygetdown
DISCLAIMER: I am not responsible if you soil your underwear, or vomit on your carpet.