The_Unknown_Banana

If A is true, then B is true, I assume.

ie. You can say that because God exists, atheists exist.
But you can't say God exists just because atheists exist.

Hence atheists existance are not proof of a God's existance, and the original statement is only true if in fact God exists. Right?

joedad

I've seen it argued that (the big G) god is atheistic. After all, His Allegedness neither recognizes nor worships any higher power, so it's definitely not Christian.

Presupper silliness aside, what happens to Chesterton's statement if (the big G) god is atheistic? It's certainly at the very least functionally atheistic.

diana

Let's see.

Let A = there is a God. Let B = there are atheists.

~A --> ~B (or, not A implies not B)

But there are atheists. Therefore (implied): there is a God.

Or, in notation, B therefore A.

Modus Tollens. 'Tis a valid argument, but lacks soundness, as it ignores the fact that there needn't be an actual thing to disbelieve--all one necessarily must disbelieve is an idea.

The simplest way to point out its weakness is to plug in your mythological creature of choice: If there were no leprauchans, there would be no people who didn't believe in them.

d

Kat_Somm_Faen

Righty, Unknown B.!

If God existed then yes, why not he has created us all and then Atheist would be also created by God. That is the way I actually interpret this "If there was no God..."

So it follows that if there is a God he created Us/Universe. Sure. No problem!


But the implication does not go in reverse with certainty! Ergo, an Atheist existing does not imply existence of a God.

As in: You have a computer at home and are a regitered member of the Infidel Web board. That implies that you use this computer to browse these boards and post also. Perfectly reasonable. You are a member and own a PC implies that you post here.

But consider: You have posted a message here implies that you did it from home. false. Says who you did it from home? Maybe you asked a friend while visiting. Maybe you did it from work. The fact that you post a message does not imply you did it from your home. Or follow the link on Wikipedia there and also make sure you click on "Modus ponens" too.

.......

Anson: A implies B is stating that if you have A than B neccesarily follows. Like saying: If I get my paycheck on Friday it implies I have money in my pocket ( assume I get paid cash ). Sure! Nothing wrong with that.

That is a the meaning of "A => B. Therefore if A then B. True." the existence of A implies existence of B.

But if I say: I have money in my pocket therefore I got paid on Friday. That is false. The implication does not go in reverse, again. B may have arisen by some other cause.

ComestibleVenom

Joedad, Surely you haven't read the bible. The biblical God is a big fan of adulation. Surely you don't suggest that God wouldn't leap upon the opportunity of using his omnipotent power to praise and worship and (yes) believe in himself with omnipotent pomp.

So no, God is certainly not an atheist. He remains an amorphous hologram projected by socially reinforced illusion.

The_Unknown_Banana

What if you spent it already?

lol, just being difficult

Kat_Somm_Faen

Well if I owe to the IRS - they took it when it reached the people that do payroll !

diana

You're right, but I think the argument actually is

A --> B is equivalent to ~B --> ~A

Which is valid.

The statement "If there were no God, there would be no atheists" takes the form of the latter, so it's a valid argument to conclude that the existence of atheists means there is a God.

It just isn't a sound argument. In order to be sound, an argument must both take a valid form and have acceptable premises. This one fails on the second count.

As Wyz_sub10 pointed out immediately, we need only have the idea of a God to reject in order to consider ourselves atheists.

So a sound variation would be, "If there were no idea of a God, there would be no atheists," but since there are atheists, there must be an idea of a God. See? Perfectly valid reversible implications, provided everything is negated.

d

Spenser

"If there were no God, there would still be Christians."

-Me

Buddrow_Wilson

No Chesterton, it would merely mean that atheism is correct. That's a really ignorant statement.