• The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I agree with your points. I just want to add that what OP was talking about is that the existence of a deity or higher power is not falsifiable and thus is impossible to logically disprove. I’m sure many, many, many people have tried on both sides.

    My favorite proof against any higher power is from the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy:

    Now, it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some have chosen to see it as the final proof of the NON-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

    “I refuse to prove that I exist,” says God, “for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.”

    “But,” says Man, “the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don’t. QED.”

    “Oh dear,” says God, “I hadn’t thought of that,” and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

    “Oh, that was easy,” says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

    Edit: changes “logically prove” to “logically disprove” as that’s why the concept of a higher power cannot be disproven.

    • myslsl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      My issue here is with what I perceive as bad argumentation, double standards and general ignorance to the field of study where these sorts of questions are applicable on the part of the person I am replying to.

      Edit: I want to be clear that I’m not saying you are doing that. I am referring to the other people I have been replying to.