# You're right, Danny C...there is no god. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 25, 2011, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983 "2011-01-25T23:35:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/61 "2011-01-26T22:30:38Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > Atheism is incompatible with all claims of anything supernatural. Otherwise Christians could be atheists just because they’re not Hindu. Atheists are atheists because they’re without belief in God/gods, not because of any other supernatural beliefs they may or may not have. What you said about Christians being able to be atheists makes no sense. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/62 "2011-01-26T22:34:13Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > Atheism is incompatible with all claims of anything supernatural. I suppose it is, if you take the philosophy and skeptical thinking behind atheism to the next level. I only had a minor quibble with the way the word was being used. ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/63 "2011-01-26T22:54:54Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > As I said above, that’s a subset of theism. Yes, that’s what you _said_. But you haven’t remotely convinced me that this idea has any merit at all. Would it be reasonable to state that unbelief in Allah’s existence is a subset of Islam, because it addresses the topic of the existence of the Muslim deity? Of course not. Your position is preposterous on its face. > [@](#): > > Trying to quantify possibilities and compare a strong to a weak or infinitesimal one is silly. Says who? And with what justification? When the subject of hell and eternal torture arises, I think it _QUITE_ reasonable to weigh the likelihood and unlikelihood of its reality in deciding whether or not to accept Christianity. Calculating risks is what wise adults do, in all spheres of existence. > [@](#): > > Take yourself and the human mind out of the equation. Um, no. I exist, and the human mind exists. I’m convinced that any philosophy that is grounded in any kind of reality needs to _account for_ these things. Your atheism-as-an-absolute thinking seems to me to apply only in realm of Platonic ideals. In other words, if I am being honest and _realistic_, I have to admit that there might be things that **I** don’t know or understand. And one or more of those things might allow for or suggest the existence of a god or gods. Ergo, I cannot declare as fact that their existence is impossible. And the corollary of “not impossible” is “possible”. QED. > [@](#): > > Either gods exist or not, irregardless of how some intelligence in the universe perceives the question. I respected what you were saying until you said “irregardless”. 😉 (j/k) Yes, what you say here is true, but that does not justify the removal of human intellectual limitations from the belief equation. > [@](#): > > A statement that they exist, in any shape, form, or possibility, is a theistic position of some sort. First of all, this is incorrect on its face, as I demonstrated in my first paragraph in this reply, above, but more to the point: _That’s not at all what I’m doing_. I’m making no factual “statement” about gods’ existence at all, beyond the personal observation that I do not _happen to believe_ in them. You do understand the difference between an expression of opinion, and a factual claim, yes? ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/64 "2011-01-26T22:55:36Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > There’s that B-word again. And thank you for proving my point…_finally._ > What-EVER… :rolleyes: You got nothing. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/65 "2011-01-26T22:58:16Z")
> [@Cyningablod](#): > > Here’s a clue, man: “Belief” =/= “Religion”. Check that dictionary link I gave you, above. Hmm, okay, lessee… ```auto re·li·gion    /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ [ri-lij-uhn] –noun 1. **A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,** esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. [...] 6. **Something one believes in and follows devotedly;** a point or matter of ethics or conscience: *to make a religion of fighting prejudice [or ignorance].* ``` Now…what was your point again? :dubious: > [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > We have evidence that mythology exists. There is no evidence for hell. However, the mythology of Hell _does_ exist. I think we can all agree on that! ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/66 "2011-01-26T23:13:12Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Hmm, okay, lessee… > > ```auto > > re·li·gion >    /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ [ri-lij-uhn] > –noun > 1. **A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,** > esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, > usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a > moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. > [...] > 6. **Something one believes in and follows devotedly;** a point or matter of ethics > or conscience: *to make a religion of fighting prejudice [or ignorance].* > > ``` > > Now…what was your point again? :dubious: I notice you carefully avoided bolding the second phrase of definition 1), above. Predictable. Here it is: > [@](#): > > […] **esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, > usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a > moral code governing the conduct of human affairs**. You understand how dictionary definitions work…yes? :smack: Atheism doesn’t meet that definition. At all. Likewise, definition 6) is what we grown-ups call a _metaphorical usage_. So if you’re pinning your atheism=religion argument on the use of “religion” in a subjective, opinionated, metaphorical sense, well, you’ve lost. But we all already knew that. Atheism is not–and never will be–a “religion” in this word’s most literal, everyday, straightfoward, common sense. It is only in the most strained, subjective, non-literal, rhetorically loaded sense of that word, that it could even remotely be called such. **Fuzzypickles** FAIL. ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/67 "2011-01-26T23:14:15Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > However, the mythology of Hell _does_ exist. I think we can all agree on that! Wow, are you being sincere here? That was _soooooo_ not his point. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/68 "2011-01-26T23:18:07Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Hmm, okay, lessee… > > ```auto > > re·li·gion >    /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ [ri-lij-uhn] > –noun > 1. **A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,** > esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, > usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a > moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. > [...] > 6. **Something one believes in and follows devotedly;** a point or matter of ethics > or conscience: *to make a religion of fighting prejudice [or ignorance].* > > ``` > > Now…what was your point again? :dubious: Dictionaries show all of the way words can be used. As the example shows, people say things like someone has made a religion out of fighting ignorance. Taking statements like that literally is a tactic theists use to claim that atheism is a religion which is what you tried to do. Lame. ETA: Beaten by another poster once again. ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/69 "2011-01-26T23:18:48Z")
By the way, **fuzzypickles** , we’re still waiting on that “evidence” of “higher intelligences”. When may I say that we can expect it? ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/70 "2011-01-26T23:23:27Z")
> [@Cyningablod](#): > > I am **STRONGLY** convinced that no god exists, but because I’m not, you know, _omniscient_ :rolleyes:, I cannot definitively rule out the ( **extremely unlikely** ) possibility. > > How is admitting to the **infinitesimally small possibility** of an unknown god’s or gods’ extistence “arguably a theistic position”? As a matter of fact, that’s the very definition of agnostism – you can “believe”, for day-to-day’s sake, that God doesn’t exist (or, at the very least, that the existence of God is irrelevant) but as long as you accept the miniscule _possibility_ that God might exist, then congratulations – you’ve been an agnostic all this time! However, it does sound as if you’re only saying that for appearance’s sake. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/71 "2011-01-26T23:29:17Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > As a matter of fact, that’s the very definition of agnostism – you can “believe”, for day-to-day’s sake, that God doesn’t exist (or, at the very least, that the existence of God is irrelevant) but as long as you accept the miniscule _possibility_ that God might exist, then congratulations – you’ve been an agnostic all this time! You’re saying that as if one can’t be agnostic and an atheist. They’re not mutually exclusive. If you’re without belief in the existence in God/gods, you’re an atheist. What you believe is possible has zero to do with it. I can keep repeating this for you until it sinks in. ---
**Author:** ![Naxos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/50afbb/32.png) [@Naxos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naxos)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/72 "2011-01-26T23:33:59Z")
> [@Cyningablod](#): > > … I’m making no factual “statement” about gods’ existence at all, beyond the personal observation that I do not _happen to believe_ in them. My comments are not about opinions. People have all kinds of opinions, true, false, medium rare or well done. The thread’s subject “there is no god” may express the opinion of the O.P. but the discussion is whether that opinion also coincides with the irrefutable and universal reality that there are no gods, a truth that is independent of human beings. There hasn’t been a society in recorded history where a majority of opinion did not involve a substantial embodiment of the irrational – see: religion. So what people think or believe or claim or opine on has to be disregarded when we determine the truth value of a statement. The truth is that there are no gods. Beliefs and opinions about this, pro or against, do not affect its reality. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/73 "2011-01-26T23:34:13Z")
> [@Cyningablod](#): > > I notice you carefully avoided bolding the second phrase of definition 1), above. Predictable. Don’t talk down to an English Major, pal. :mad: By the standard rules of grammar, any dependent clause (after the comma) preceded by “esp.” means that it affects the independent clause most of the time, but not all of the time. IOW, that particular phrase isn’t required, and can be redacted w/o altering the sentence itself. > [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > You’re saying that as if one can’t be agnostic and an atheist. They’re not mutually exclusive. If you’re without belief in the existence in God/gods, you’re an atheist. What you believe is possible has zero to do with it. No, the two terms are _entirely_ discrete. Atheism = No God. Agnosticism = Probably No God (but maybe, if more evidence comes to light…) Why is that so challenging to comprehend??? ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/74 "2011-01-26T23:44:34Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > No, the two terms are _entirely_ discrete. Atheism = No God. Agnosticism = Probably No God (but maybe, if more evidence comes to light…) > > Why is that so challenging to comprehend??? I comprehend what you’re saying, but you’re wrong. Atheism and theism deal with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. They’re not mutually exclusive. > **[Agnostic Atheist](https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/agnostic-atheist-faq.htm)** > > Agnostic Atheist - A concise introduction to the multifaceted world of those who live their lives without knowing if God exists. [http://atheism.wikia.com/wiki/Atheist\_vs\_Agnostic](http://atheism.wikia.com/wiki/Atheist_vs_Agnostic) [http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutagnosticism/a/atheism.htm](http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutagnosticism/a/atheism.htm) Are you going to answer the first question I asked you in post #52? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/75 "2011-01-26T23:51:06Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Hmm, okay, lessee… > > ```auto > > re·li·gion >    /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ [ri-lij-uhn] > –noun > 1. **A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,** > esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, > usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a > moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. > [...] > 6. **Something one believes in and follows devotedly;** a point or matter of ethics > or conscience: *to make a religion of fighting prejudice [or ignorance].* > > ``` > > Now…what was your point again? :dubious: Atheism is not a belief nor a set of beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/76 "2011-01-26T23:52:56Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Don’t talk down to an English Major, pal. :mad: By the standard rules of grammar, any dependent clause (after the comma) preceded by “esp.” means that it affects the independent clause most of the time, but not all of the time. IOW, that particular phrase isn’t required, and can be redacted w/o altering the sentence itself. Which leaves us with: _A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe_ That’s not a description of atheism. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/77 "2011-01-26T23:54:14Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > As a matter of fact, that’s the very definition of agnostism No it isn’t. Agnosticism is not a position on the existence of gods, it’s a position about what it’s possible to _know_. It’s possible to be both agnostic and theistic or agnostic and atheistic. Agnosticism is not, as is popularly believed, a neutral position on the existence of gods, that’s weak atheism. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2011, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/78 "2011-01-26T23:56:32Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > No, the two terms are _entirely_ discrete. Atheism = No God. Agnosticism = Probably No God (but maybe, if more evidence comes to light…) > > Why is that so challenging to comprehend??? You have both of those definitions wrong. Don’t use words if you don’t know what they mean. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2011, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/79 "2011-01-27T00:27:19Z")
I thought atheism meant “without theism”. You know, the way “sanskrit” means “without krit.” ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2011, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983/80 "2011-01-27T00:43:15Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > As a matter of fact, that’s the very definition of agnostism – you can “believe”, for day-to-day’s sake, that God doesn’t exist (or, at the very least, that the existence of God is irrelevant) but as long as you accept the miniscule _possibility_ that God might exist, then congratulations – you’ve been an agnostic all this time! WTF?? You are getting more bizarre with every post. How is someone who says, “I do not believe in god” only an _agnostic_? You and **Naxos** seem like two peas in a pod, only on opposite ideological ends of this question. And neither one of you is making a damn bit of sense. I think you’re mixing up me, with self-proclaimed agnostics who are default, day-to-day _atheists_. Do please try to keep them straight, mkay? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youre-right-danny-c-there-is-no-god/568983.md?page=5)