There is no god, and yes I can say that

Sun, 06/07/2009 - 05:43 - Paul Almond

Theists and agnostics often say that nobody can say that there is no god. This is not merely disagreement with the statement that there is no god – for example because they think the claim is reasonable or is supported by evidence. They mean that nobody can validly say that there is no god even in principle, because this would mean proving with certainty that God does not exist, and total knowledge would be needed to rule out the idea completely. This article argues against this, showing that it is semantically consistent to say that there is no god, if we consider God to be sufficiently implausible, even in the absence of an absolute proof of God’s non-existence.

By Paul Almond

Any claim made for an object’s existence implies many claims of the non-existence of “invalidators” – implausible objects that would invalidate the claim, or at least make it unsafe, if they existed. If God is like an invalidator, asserting God’s non-existence is entirely consistent, regardless of what position is taken on invalidators, with how semantics normally deals with invalidators.

Many atheists accept that they cannot prove that there is no god, and say that their
position is one of non-belief, and that saying that you do not believe in something is not
the same as saying that it does not exist. I will not argue with this. My own view,
however, is this:

There is no god.

Read entire article here.

Share this article with:

Atheism & Religion

Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version

Good job Paul

On June 7th, 2009 mikedurland says:

I read your entire article and I NOW understand your position when you say "There is no god".

Mike

Thank you, Mike

On June 7th, 2009 Paul Almond says:

I appreciate the comment. I also accept that my view that God is an "invalidator-type object" does need some defending too.

Nice article, it seems.

On June 9th, 2009 Pythagoras says:

Paul, the logic seems sound and the analysis seems thorough, and it's very clearly explained, but you do realise, don't you, that Satan is just making it seem like you can reasonably say there is no God? ;-)

Regards,
Pythagoras

You may be missing the theists' point

On June 9th, 2009 atofel says:

Hi Paul:

A few comments on your article.

It seems to me that the difference is that when someone says, "there is no god", they could be either:

1. Making a statement of established fact

- or -

2. Making a statement of faith

If it is a statement of faith, then I believe most theists and agnostics would be ok with it. It is when the statement is made with the implication that it is established fact that they object. One is asserting a belief, and the other is implying that if you are sane, rational and informed, you too must believe this. This is the rub--are you just saying that you believe this, or are you saying that unless I am stupid I should too?

Also, you are really dealing with epistemology here. You should address the fact that different philosophies view knowledge in different ways and have different criteria for what establishes something as "knowledge". Many atheists back themselves into a corner by imposing an empirical criteria for knowledge. In order for something to be considered 'true' according to their metaphysics, it must satisfy a scientific method of investigation. It must be knowable through our senses (sight,sound,touch,taste,etc) and must be independently verifiable. When an atheist establishes these criteria, they will find that the non-existence of God cannot be asserted as an established fact.

Andy

I totally agree with the

On July 13th, 2009 JoeAnne10 says:

I totally agree with the comment you posted here Pythagoras. This guy Paul may have the idea that he convinced a lot of people that you can truly say that there is no god. But I bet he said many times things like "for god`s sake" or things like that. Even an non believer know there is a higher person that rule this universe. And you may also be under the effect of Norco abuse :P