Utente:Socho-sama/Sandbox

Argomentazioni contro l'esistenza di Dio

Ciascuna delle seguenti argomentazioni mira a dimostrare o che un particolare sottoinsieme di dèi non esiste (dimostrando che sono intrinsecamente privi di significato, sono contraddittori o contraddicono fatti scientifici o storici noti) o che non c'è una ragione sufficiente per credere in loro.

Argomentazioni empiriche

Le argomentazioni empiriche si basano su dati empirici per dimostrare le proprie conclusioni.

• The argument from inconsistent revelations contests the existence of the deity called God as described in testi sacri — such as the religione ebraica Tanakh, the Cristianesimo Bibbia, or the Islam Corano — by identifying apparent contradictions between different scriptures, within a single scripture, or between scripture and known facts. To be effective this argument requires the other side to hold that its inerranza della Bibbia, or to conflate the record itself with the God it describes.
• The problem of evil contests the existence of a god who is both onnipotenza and omnibenevolent by arguing that such a god should not permit the existence of male or sofferenza. The theist responses are called teodicea.
• The argument from poor design contests the idea that God created life on the basis that life-forms, including humans, seem to exhibit poor design.
• The argument from nonbelief contests the existence of an omnipotent God who wants humans to believe in him by arguing that such a god would do a better job of gathering believers.
• The argument from criterio della massima parsimonia contends that since natural (non-supernatural) theories adequately explain the development of religion and belief in gods, the actual existence of such supernatural agents is superfluous and may be dismissed unless otherwise proven to be required to explain the phenomenon.
• It is argued that belief in God does not help make accurate predictions of future events in the real world, so Rasoio di Occam may be applied to eliminate this unnecessary hypothesis.
• The analogy of teiera di Russell argues that the onere della prova for the existence of God lies with the theist rather than the atheist.

Argomentazioni deduttive

Le argomentazioni deduttive cercano di dimostrare le loro conclusioni con il metodo deduttivo a partire da premesse vere.

• The Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit is a counter-argument to the argomento teleologico. The argument from design claims that a complex or ordered structure must be designed. However, a god that is responsible for the creation of a universe would be at least as complicated as the universe that it creates. Therefore, it too must require a designer. And its designer would require a designer also, ad infinitum. The argument for the existence of god is then a logical fallacy with or without the use of special pleading. The Ultimate 747 gambit points out that God does not provide an origin of complexity, it simply assumes that complexity always existed. It also states that design fails to account for complexity, which selezione naturale can explain.
• The paradosso dell'onnipotenza suggests that the concept of an onnipotenza entity is logically contradictory, from considering a question like: "Can God create a rock so big that he cannot lift it?" or "If God is all powerful, could God create a being more powerful than itself?".
• Another argument suggests that there is a contradiction between God being omniscient and omnipotent, basically asking "how can an all-knowing being change its mind?"
• The problem of hell is that some consider the existence of Hell in several religions to be morally indefensible, or inconsistent with God's omnibenevolence or ubiquità.
• The argument from free will contests the existence of an omniscient god who has libero arbitrio - or has allotted the same freedom to his creations - by arguing that the two properties are contradictory. According to the argument, if God already knows the future, then humanity is destined to corroborate with his knowledge of the future and not have true free will to deviate from it. Therefore our free will contradicts an omniscient god. Another argument attacks the existence of an omniscient god who has free will directly in arguing that the will of God himself would be bound to follow whatever God foreknows himself doing in eternity future.
• The Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God contests the existence of an intelligent creator by suggesting that such a being would make logic and morality contingent, which is incompatible with the presuppositionalist assertion that they are necessary, and contradicts the efficacy of science. A more general line of argument based on this argument seeks to generalize this argument to all necessary features of the universe and all god-concepts.
• The counter-argument against the Cosmological argument ("chicken or the egg") takes its assumption that things cannot exist without creators and applies it to God, setting up an infinite regress. This attacks the premise that the universe is the second cause (after God, who is claimed to be the first cause).
• Noncognitivismo teologico, as used in literature, usually seeks to disprove the god-concept by showing that it is unverifiable by scientific tests.

Argomentazioni induttive

Le argomentazioni induttive sostengono le loro conclusioni tramite il metodo induttivo.

• The ateismo-esistenzialismo argument for the non-existence of a perfect sentient being states that if existence precedes essence, it follows from the meaning of the term sentient that a sentient being cannot be complete or perfect. It is touched upon by Jean-Paul Sartre in Being and Nothingness. Sartre's phrasing is that God would be a pour-soi [a being-for-itself; a consciousness] who is also an en-soi [a being-in-itself; a thing]: which is a contradiction in terms. The argument is echoed thus in Salman Rushdie's novel Grimus: "That which is complete is also dead."
• The "no reason" argument tries to show that an omnipotent and omniscient being would not have any reason to act in any way, specifically by creating the universe, because it would have no needs, wants, or desires since these very concepts are subjectively human. As the universe exists, there is a contradiction, and therefore, an omnipotent god cannot exist. This argument is espoused by Scott Adams in the book God's Debris.
• The "historical induction" argument concludes that since most theistic religions throughout history (e.g. religione egizia, religione greca) and their gods ultimately come to be regarded as untrue or incorrect, all theistic religions, including contemporary ones, are therefore most likely untrue/incorrect by induction. It is implied as part of Stephen F. Roberts' popular quotation: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

Subjective arguments

Similar to the subjective arguments for the existence of God, subjective arguments against the supernatural mainly rely on the testimony or experience of witnesses, or the propositions of a rivelazione religione in general.

• The witness argument gives credibility to personal witnesses, contemporary and from the past, who disbelieve or strongly doubt the existence of God.
• The conflicted religions argument notes that many religions give differing accounts as to what God is and what God wants; since all the contradictory accounts cannot be correct, many if not all religions must be incorrect.