>We dont know, therefore god Why do people use this baseless

>>1622405
All conceptions of what the purpose of existence is, are faith based

>>1622405
Because God's ways are mysterious.

The world is scary. People with tough constitution can face the intricacies and ambiguities of the world. Weakling cant.

These weaklings spin many moral systems to ease their perspective on the world. This creates what Kant called a "space of reasons", which are explanations for why things are the way they are. You honor your mother and father because you now have reason to after this invention, which helps shield against how scary the world is.

Christianity is a myth with tons of effort put into making these reasons really convincing. However they ultimately failed and God died, except for Protestantism, the second worst German invention. The myths for a new comprehensive world view have not been fully constructed, though, so society is in a weird state where people often don't see reason and purpose in the world, science is anti-teleology. Autists and fedoras cling to the old myths because they're uninventive, unoriginal and most importantly, terrified of life.

That's why their faith appears so utter insane. The truth is, fear and weakness drives the need for mythology of reasons for existence.

Remember to hide thread

>>1622405
see this house? i do not know who built it, therefore bricks, roof, windows were combined together by themselves purely by accident.

>>1622470
see this house? even though i have never seen him or met him, i know who built it, and moreover he built invisible lasers into the walls which zap you when you're mean to people.

>>1622405
>We can't touch, see, or feel it, therefore no god
Why do people use this baseless arguement?

>>1622483
>built invisible lasers into the walls which zap you when you're mean to people.
this part is telling. i'd get your facts straight about hell and divine justice, because you may one day see yourself there.

>>1622501
>straight up admitting you have no basis for your beliefs
>actually think this is an argument in your favor

>>1622514
>We can't touch, see, or feel Julius Caesar, therefore he never existed
>We can't touch, see, or feel the law of non-contradiction, therefore it doesn't exist
>We can't touch, see, or feel the Big Bang, therefore it never happened

>>1622520

We can certainly touch, see, and feel the evidence for those things, which is why we believe in them.

File: mis.png (138KB, 764x1780px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 764x1780px

>>1622562
then likewise can we for God, which is why we believe in Him

>>1622577

Except, we can't, otherwise you wouldn't have to resort to "but don't you believe in the wind????? XDDD" nonsense. The whole argument is an attempt to justify belief without evidence.

No one has ever changed nor will ever change their minds in these threads. (There's probably no god btw.)

>>1622405
>we don't know therefore 'x'
can be literally used for anything if you follow the question to an irreducible explanation......
This isn't a big objection.
We don't know therefore -insert atomic theory here-
Then follow that with
>we don't know therefore -insert explanation of explanation of explanation and so on of atomic theory arriving at a point where the only answer is "it just is"-
The only way around this would be to have absolute knowledge.
>>1622436
Yes, obviously the rough and tumble goatherders had existential crises every other week.
You know how those illiterate hill peoples get.... always with the never ending nihilism and deep philosophical angst.....you fucking idiot.

>>1622436
>The truth is, fear and weakness drives the need for mythology of reasons for existence.
The Norsemen were very troubled about their existential existence, in fact that's we have so many records of them battling the stark nihilism.
The same with the Romans, Greeks, and Gauls, you know all of them, just absolutely terrified, yet whenever we read of them or appeal to the empirical evidence which suggests they didn't even consider such matters... well you know... the empirical history MUST be incorrect in the face of your laser focused logical assertion....

JUST
/his/ is so full of retards it isn't even funny.
>>1622594
Why can't you just believe the stories?
It seems you apply scrutiny inconsistently.
The Bible has so many historical correlations its not even funny, the only thing that comes close is Judaism and Islam.
These religion are deeply tied to the land, no other religion is like this, no other holy text mentions concrete places.
For instance the Bible speaks of Rome, Athens, Jerusalem, Pergamon, Babylon, all these places exist.
The correlations are cause for some disturbance and intrigue.
To reject the Bible outright is an unthinking position, its not an analytical position, its not a historical position.

You're objection is a non-issue.

>>1623035
>Why can't you just believe the stories?
Do you believe fucking everything you hear?

>>1622405
Because it makes them feel superior to people who are smarter than themselves.

>>1622405
We don't know anything about anything. Faith is the basis for all things.

>We don't know, therefore atheism
See? It is called "faith" for a reason.

>>1623800
You sure act like it's more than faith a-fucking-lot.

>>1623807
>you
Who? I'm not religious

& Humanities was a mistake.