How Would You React If At The End Of The Day Atheism Was Right?

[rojse]

If science could somehow prove that God did not exist. Than on that day, I hope that the believers tell science where to stick it and believe in God none the less.

Science is not designed to prove or disprove God.

 

[s2a]

Well....if it were hypothetically possible to prove without a doubt that God does not exist (without dying first), then I would first give in to total despair, then after moping for a long, long time, get off my bum and fill my life up with as many amazing experiences as I could. And I would strive to make the world a better place too, while I'm at it. Might as well make my meager existence somewhat meaningful.

I retain no reasoned doubts that that "god(s)" do not exist in any observable, naturally explicable..."existence" that can be scientifically tested, measured, or independently validated.

However, it may be hypothesized that a particular (named or claimed god) can be reasonably accepted as being highly unlikely or improbable, based upon evidence that either suggests or infers that a particular (claimed) god is not required to explain a given phenomena.

It all depends upon any given hypothetical premise.

Can water (or air, or soccer balls) exist without a god as a requisite causal instigator (or creator)? Science can provide both plausible and and evidenced-based conclusions that suggest that any "god" need not be attributed as "origin" of such readily testable phenomena.

It's sort of like posing the question, "Who delivered the mail to your mailbox yesterday...was it the assigned postal carrier, or was it god?"

You could hypothesize that it WAS god that delivered your mail, but then you might want to search for some evidence to validate that hypothesis. You could more readily investigate as to whom, exactly, delivered your mail that previous day...and afterwards, feel relatively confident that it was--in fact--your duly sworn and route-bound letter-carrier that delivered your mail. Could it have been god, instead of that civil servant? Perhaps...but there's no evidence that god took that route that day, and yet there's plenty of evidence to support the conclusion that the ordinary mailman delivered your mail, as initially "hypothesized".

The "god hypothesis" of junk mail being divinely delivered to your mailbox was/is certainly one possibility of many other groundless/unfounded "hypothetical" possibilities...but if it can be both evidenced, and repeatedly demonstrated that your mail can be delivered on a an expectantly regular basis without any god being necessary to the process...then there is no need to either assume or speculate (ie, hypothesize) the added postulation of "Maybe god did it" to be therefore an equally plausible (or merited) explanation/alternative.

The really funny thing is, your mail will continue to be delivered, whether you "believe" in civil servant postal carriers, or not. If there is an interruption in that service, you can typically investigate how/why that temporary cessation of regular delivery of expectant mail has transpired, which again my be "hypotheisized" to be divinely ordained/manifested, or perhaps attributed to more mundane and ordinary naturalistic causes.

Thing is...most of us do not claim to have any "personal relationship" with our local letter-carriers to "believe" that our mail just might be delivered by some surrogate/stand-in god tomorrow. What "believers" might envision as some "divine intervention" upon visiting an empty mailbox tomorrow...atheists prefer to "hypothesize" that their regular-route mailman had nothing to deliver that day...and, life goes on without concern for any supernatural cause/effect explanation/worry as to what an empty mailbox might otherwise portend for the day's prospective exploits/endeavors.

Atheists are funny that way, and don't wonder whether or not those "Super-Saver" inserts of pizza and dry-cleaning coupons have any special "message of individualized purpose" in how we may choose to find "meaning" in volunteer efforts on behalf of the poor, or whether or not ordering a discount-priced pizza with extra ham is a "sin" against a particularly persnickety god.

 

[Jeremiah]

Science is not designed to prove or disprove God.

That was my point. People should not rely on science or reason to believe in God. They should believe, because they have faith in God and his/her virtue.

 

[Popeyesays]

If I were to die and learn the truth about it all, I wouldn't know the truth about it all because my consciousness would be gone. Therefore I would have no feelings.

Regards,

Scott

 

[Prometheus]

Instead of being depressed that your life will end, feel thankful you got a life in the first place. You are unimaginably lucky.

Oh, and I should add that you can believe in an afterlife as an Atheist.

 

[rojse]

I retain no reasoned doubts that that "god(s)" do not exist in any observable, naturally explicable..."existence" that can be scientifically tested, measured, or independently validated.

However, it may be hypothesized that a particular (named or claimed god) can be reasonably accepted as being highly unlikely or improbable, based upon evidence that either suggests or infers that a particular (claimed) god is not required to explain a given phenomena.

It all depends upon any given hypothetical premise.

Can water (or air, or soccer balls) exist without a god as a requisite causal instigator (or creator)? Science can provide both plausible and and evidenced-based conclusions that suggest that any "god" need not be attributed as "origin" of such readily testable phenomena.

It's sort of like posing the question, "Who delivered the mail to your mailbox yesterday...was it the assigned postal carrier, or was it god?"

You could hypothesize that it WAS god that delivered your mail, but then you might want to search for some evidence to validate that hypothesis. You could more readily investigate as to whom, exactly, delivered your mail that previous day...and afterwards, feel relatively confident that it was--in fact--your duly sworn and route-bound letter-carrier that delivered your mail. Could it have been god, instead of that civil servant? Perhaps...but there's no evidence that god took that route that day, and yet there's plenty of evidence to support the conclusion that the ordinary mailman delivered your mail, as initially "hypothesized".

The "god hypothesis" of junk mail being divinely delivered to your mailbox was/is certainly one possibility of many other groundless/unfounded "hypothetical" possibilities...but if it can be both evidenced, and repeatedly demonstrated that your mail can be delivered on a an expectantly regular basis without any god being necessary to the process...then there is no need to either assume or speculate (ie, hypothesize) the added postulation of "Maybe god did it" to be therefore an equally plausible (or merited) explanation/alternative.

The really funny thing is, your mail will continue to be delivered, whether you "believe" in civil servant postal carriers, or not. If there is an interruption in that service, you can typically investigate how/why that temporary cessation of regular delivery of expectant mail has transpired, which again my be "hypotheisized" to be divinely ordained/manifested, or perhaps attributed to more mundane and ordinary naturalistic causes.

Thing is...most of us do not claim to have any "personal relationship" with our local letter-carriers to "believe" that our mail just might be delivered by some surrogate/stand-in god tomorrow. What "believers" might envision as some "divine intervention" upon visiting an empty mailbox tomorrow...atheists prefer to "hypothesize" that their regular-route mailman had nothing to deliver that day...and, life goes on without concern for any supernatural cause/effect explanation/worry as to what an empty mailbox might otherwise portend for the day's prospective exploits/endeavors.

Atheists are funny that way, and don't wonder whether or not those "Super-Saver" inserts of pizza and dry-cleaning coupons have any special "message of individualized purpose" in how we may choose to find "meaning" in volunteer efforts on behalf of the poor, or whether or not ordering a discount-priced pizza with extra ham is a "sin" against a particularly persnickety god.

I like your analogy involving God and mail. It sums up how I feel exactly.

I'd give you frubals, except I need to spread them around.