I'm doing a piece of academic research and want to test a theory. The theory is that rational arguments against the existence of God from Dawkins or whoever aren't pesuasive to believers, and religious arguments for His existence don't persuade atheists. I am not trying to persuade anyone either way, just interested in your opinions on the theory.
As one small example, let's take The Argument from Evil by some atheists. It goes like this:
1. Evil exists and is everywhere. Both human or moral evil and natural evil, (like disasters etc).
2. Theists claim God exists, created the world, and is perfectly good, all-knowing and all-powerful.
3. Thus (atheists claim) either God doesn't exist, or isn't perfect,all-knowing, all powerful etc.
Despite the logic of the argument (and BTW there are good logical counter-arguments) I don't think these type of arguments convince people who believe in God that their belief is wrong, they live with the ambiguity and mystery quite well imo. What do you think? And if you can, say why you think as you do.
As one small example, let's take The Argument from Evil by some atheists. It goes like this:
1. Evil exists and is everywhere. Both human or moral evil and natural evil, (like disasters etc).
2. Theists claim God exists, created the world, and is perfectly good, all-knowing and all-powerful.
3. Thus (atheists claim) either God doesn't exist, or isn't perfect,all-knowing, all powerful etc.
Despite the logic of the argument (and BTW there are good logical counter-arguments) I don't think these type of arguments convince people who believe in God that their belief is wrong, they live with the ambiguity and mystery quite well imo. What do you think? And if you can, say why you think as you do.
Last edited: