Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I'm interested in any reasons to (reasonably) want theism to be false?

I'm not talking about certain versions of theism, like Calvinist Christianity, or the doctrine of "eternal conscious torment", or the "god of the Bible"; but I'm rather asking about theism on a more general level.

I'm especially interested in any quotes/references that can be given to 'name' atheists or philosophers.

That's an interesting question, and I would guess that it would have empirical answers as well as theoretical ones.

My guess is that simple cognitive biases would be the most broadly applicable (confirmation bias, e.g.).

I'm not sure where this is going, though, which might affect the genuine utility of the answers we can come up with.

As to the 'names,' my guess would be to mine Nietzsche. He's always good for a quotable.

Peter Kirby wrote: My guess is that simple cognitive biases would be the most broadly applicable (confirmation bias, e.g.).

I'm not sure where this is going, though, which might affect the genuine utility of the answers we can come up with.

??

I'm thinking of things like, "I wouldn't want a God to exist, because an all knowing God would destroy all privacy".

Now that's some sort of reason, although I doubt it's a strong enough objection to properly justify wanting theism to be false.

theism
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ish/theism

Theism is a belief in the existence of a god(s). God has never spoken , but there are many people speaking for god and doing much more than just talking. Religion is organised theism and as the most general introduction to the subject of the OP, I would suggest this pdf.
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/gener ... 51550.html
http://www.agreatgift.org/index.html
http://www.agreatgift.org/pdf/AGreatGif ... ForYou.pdf

bskeptic wrote: I'm thinking of things like, "I wouldn't want a God to exist, because an all knowing God would destroy all privacy".

What here comes to my mind is, that an all knowing god cannot be allmighty. If God is all knowing, then all processes are defined (fixed?) in the universe, from the big bang to the end, and he can't change them, which means that he is not allmighty then.

bskeptic wrote:I'm interested in any reasons to (reasonably) want theism to be false?

b/c theism is unrealistic, distracting, and costly to societies.

It creates unnecessary power structures.

MrMacSon wrote:

bskeptic wrote:I'm interested in any reasons to (reasonably) want theism to be false?

b/c theism is unrealistic, distracting, and costly to societies.

It creates unnecessary power structures.

On the other hand, the falsehood of theism doesn't lead to there being any less of it...

This question is probably more interesting to those who view atheism as a counterfactual, rather than simple reality.

You could have a look at the wikipedia article about Jean Meslier (1664 - 1729), a french priest living at the time of Louis XIV.

Voltaire published his own expurgated version as Extraits des sentiments (feelings) de Jean Meslier (first edition, 1762).

«Il souhaitait que tous les grands de la Terre et que tous les nobles fussent pendus et étranglés avec les boyaux des prêtres.»
He wished that all the powerful persons and all the nobles should be hanged and strangled with the bowels of the priests.
This happened around 1793 in France.

Here is an extract :

Upon which basis did they founded this alleged certitude of the existence of God ? On the beauty, the order and the perfections of the works of nature ? But why look for an invisible and unknown God as the creator of beings and things, even when the beings and the things exist, and, consequently, it is much easier to assign the creative and organizing force to what we see, what we touch, that is matter itself ? All the qualities and powers which are assigned to a God, who is placed outside the nature, why should we not assign them to the nature itself, which is eternal ?
Nothing is created. Nothing is lost. Neither time nor space have been created : for if a being had created the time, he should have been outside the time, and nothing can be outside the time. To create the space, he should have been outside the space, and nothing can be outside the space. And finally, to create the matter, he should have been outside the matter, and nothing can be outside the matter. The world is a confused mixture of good and evil ; it results that it has not been created by an infinitely perfect being, and, as a consequence, there is no God.

Chris wrote:

bskeptic wrote: I'm thinking of things like, "I wouldn't want a God to exist, because an all knowing God would destroy all privacy".

What here comes to my mind is, that an all knowing god cannot be allmighty. If God is all knowing, then all processes are defined (fixed?) in the universe, from the big bang to the end, and he can't change them, which means that he is not allmighty then.

That's not an argument that we should want theism to be false.

It's an argument that theism is an incoherent concept.

MrMacSon wrote:

bskeptic wrote:I'm interested in any reasons to (reasonably) want theism to be false?

b/c theism is unrealistic, distracting, and costly to societies.

How does that make sense?

"theism is unrealistic so we should want it to be false"?
"theism is distracting so we should want it to be false"?

It creates unnecessary power structures.

But what if it's actually correct? then maybe the power structures would be a small issue all things considered? Or actually a good and needed thing?