God Probably Doesn't Exist

I will present my arguments supporting the position that God is improbable. Contention 1: The Problem of Evil This is probably the most well known,used, and simple argument against God today. It simply states that since evil exists, God does not. Put formally. 1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. 2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. 3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. 4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. 5. Evil exists. 6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. C. Therefore, God doesn’t exist From [1] Contention 2: The Argument from Temporal Minds This argument is saying that a mind must be temporal or bare bad consequences for the theist. A mind as we usually think of it must have temporal duration. In order for thought A to go into thought B there must be time. If there was no time yet mental processing, then he would have a timeline of past, present and future with no time. If thought A goes to B, we have a past (thought A) a present (thought B) and a future with thought C or continue with thought B. which is incoherent. Yet, God is defined as atemporal, he can’t have a mind and since God’s mind cannot exist, he cannot exist. Some theists have resorted to calling God’s mind a static mind. In which there is no sequential thought, every thought is there in the mind of God [2]. The consequences of this would result in a self contradictory idea of God. If a mind is static, every choice is locked into place. God choose to create the universe without a chance to chose. This means if God is necessary, God must create the universe, making the creation of the universe a necessary event. However, a part of what it means to be necessary means it must exist regardless of anything else. It can’t not exist. Making the idea that God creating our contingent universe contradictory. Alternatively, one could say God’s entire mind can be different. However, this would make God a contingent being, because God’s essence is his mind. Formally put 1. God is/has a mind 2. God’s mind is either static of successive (law of excluded middle). 3. If being static or successive bares non-existential consequences for God, then God does not exist. 4. A static and successive mind does bare non-existential consequences for God. C. Therefore, God does not exist. This argument was created by modifying two arguments, one by Rational_thinker9119 and the other by Sargon. Thanks to them. Contention 3: The Argument from Physically Dependant Minds This argument is purely probabilistic, saying it is unlikely that there should ever be a physically independent mind. 1. If God exists, he is a disembodied mind. 2. If MDP(mind-brain dependence) is probable, then an existing disembodied mind is improbable. 3. MDP is probable 4. Therefore it is improbable for there to be a disembodied mind C. God is unlikely. Premise 1 is true by the accepted definition. Premise 2 is analytically true. If the mind probably must depend on a brain then by definition a mind probably cannot exist on its own. Premise 3 is known by many lines of evidence. After extensive research in this area, philosopher Michael Tooley gave 5 pieces of evidence to support the likelihood of mind brain dependence [3. (1) When an individual's brain is directly stimulated and put into a certain physical state, this causes the person to have a corresponding experience. [4] (2) Certain injuries to the brain make it impossible for a person to have any mental states at all. [5] (3) Other injuries to the brain destroy various mental capacities. Which capacity is destroyed is tied directly to the particular region of the brain that was damaged. [6] (4) When we examine the mental capacities of animals, they become more complex as their brains become more complex. [7] (5) Within any given species, the development of mental capacities is correlated with the development of neurons in the brain [8][9] Tooley concludes “All minds that it is generally agreed that we are definitely acquainted with . .. are either purely physical in nature or else are causally dependent on something physical in nature. " Premises 4 and the conclusion follow necessarily. The resolution is affirmed. Con’s Case Con’s argument is the argument from contingency. I will outline why the argument fails to prove God is more probable. Determining contingency Con says a contingent substance is one that can possibly not exist. I would like Con to answer how he knows what is and isn’t possible. For instance, how do we know the universe could possibly not exist? This rebuttal will continue when he answers this. Why God? Con attempts to show this necessary being is a sentient one. His justification for intellect is that the cause must contain the effect by way of idea. Since it can contain an infinite amount of information, it is thus intelligent. However, there is no reason why some type of non-seitnet mindless immaterial necessary powerful force can’t contain all needed information. It could be a mindless force that randomly creates. The universe would have to be created. This would be much simpler since mindless randomness is much not as complex as an ordered mind. It has just about all the properties of God except sentence and is just as good. Furthermore, it could be the case that a contingent something is necessary. In order for something else contingent to not exist, it may be the case that there must exist some other contingent substance. This means that a necessary being is not necessary. I have shown that God probably doesn’t exist and that Con’s argument fails. Back to Con. [1] . http://plato.stanford.edu... [2] . http://carm.org... [3] . http://www.leaderu.com... [4] One example is from the studies of Jose Delgado. He was able to control a person’s mind through the brain [. http://www.biotele.com...] [. http://www.cabinetmagazine.org...] [5]. http://www.cdc.gov... [6] ibid [7] . http://facultypages.morris.umn.edu... [8] ibid [9] . http://www.nature.com... [10] . http://www.popsci.com... [11] . http://www.nature.com...