-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it possible to prove something does NOT exist?
- Thread starter The Sum of Awe
- Start date
Are we accepting as a premise that logical contradictions constitute proof of non-existence?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Is it possible to prove something does NOT exist?
What is the problem in proving it?
Regards
What is the problem in proving it?
Regards
In most contexts that means claiming omniscience.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
G-d is an attributive being, He is the Creator. It is very reasonable for a creator to have unlimited and complete knowledge of everything.
Regards
Well, that is sort of the point...
Edited to add: what I mean is that you would have to establish that God exists and that he is omniscient first. Neither is actually possible, so...
Last edited:
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Actually, no, we do not. Quite the opposite.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Why?
And agnostics hold the view that they don't know if God exists or not, so I'm not sure why they have to prove something that they don't believe can be proven either way.
An agnostic usually do not think it's possible to prove God to exist or not exist, so why ask them to prove when they don't think it can be proved?
A real number solution to the square root of a negative number does not exist.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I'm trying to understand why you say such things.
Atheists most certainly need no justification to be atheists.
But some people seem to somehow have convinced themselves of the opposite. I don't know how that happens, but I guess it links somehow to the belief that people are "born theists".
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
That doesn't make sense at all. You probably need to think about that a little more.
Put it this way. Do you know or believe there's a gnome in my garden? If you do, then prove it. If you don't, then prove that. Isn't that a ridiculous demand from me to ask you to both prove it to exist and not exist when you really currently don't know?
You're asking the agnostic, who doesn't know if God exist and believes you can't prove either way, to prove that God both exists and not exists to support his/her position. That's just ludicrous.
Maybe you're just joking, and I missed the punchline...
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
He also demands that agnostics to prove that God exists and not-exists at the same time to support their view of not being able to prove God...
As if disbelief were, I dunno, some sort of demand of privilege?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
He also demands that agnostics to prove that God exists and not-exists at the same time to support their view of not being able to prove God...
If they are responsible persons as they say; why should they put on a coat of ignorance permanently?
They are as wrong as the Atheists or Skeptics.
Regards
And as right as the atheists, the skeptics, and the theists.
Perhaps, but that still does not explain why atheists would need to prove something.