Does Atheism have evidence (meaning, believe, born, Creator)

[Mr5150]

That when one dies one ceases to exist. The lights go out and all is quiet and you just become worm food. I’ve read this as an opinion. But no evidence has ever been presented. Just opinion. Can anyone help me out? Inquiring minds want to know.

[phetaroi]

I would say the answer is no. At least not that I've seen.

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

That when one dies one ceases to exist. The lights go out and all is quiet and you just become worm food. I’ve read this as an opinion. But no evidence has ever been presented. Just opinion. Can anyone help me out? Inquiring minds want to know.

This is an odd question.

Dead people typically are not seen roaming around or otherwise participating in life, following death. So yes, they have ceased to exist (except of course as a mass of molecules).

If you are talking about non-corporeal life, there's simply no evidence of it, ghost stories notwithstanding.

You might want to note that according to the rules of logic, it's impossible to prove a negative. You are asking for proof that non-corporeal life is not true, which is impossible to demonstrate. Proof is affirmative - if you think that non-corporeal life exists after death, it's up to you to provide some evidence.

[HeelaMonster]

Before we deal with the back end, let's look at the front end. Do you believe that you existed in some way before your parents' egg and sperm came together to form the unique individual that became you?

If not, if you didn't exist before you were born, why would things be any different after you die?

[TroutDude]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

That when one dies one ceases to exist. The lights go out and all is quiet and you just become worm food. I’ve read this as an opinion. But no evidence has ever been presented. Just opinion. Can anyone help me out? Inquiring minds want to know.

Ever seen a body that's been dead a few days?

[Mightyqueen801]

Does grammar has rules?

[jacqueg]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

Does grammar has rules?

Well, cats can has cheezburger... https://icanhas.cheezburger.com

[Harry Diogenes]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

That when one dies one ceases to exist. The lights go out and all is quiet and you just become worm food. I’ve read this as an opinion. But no evidence has ever been presented. Just opinion. Can anyone help me out? Inquiring minds want to know.

Yes, it is just not conclusive evidence. The lack of evidence for an afterlife is the evidence it does not exist, because that lack of evidence is what we expect if this life is all there is. The problem is there could be other reasons why there is not evidence.

We also have the evidence that NDEs are based on the culture of the person having them, which indicates they are a cultural product of a dying brain trying to make sense of something it does not normally experience. And I believe there is a paper that shows NDEs are formed after the event, not during it. Unfortunately I have lost the link before I had a chance to look at it.

It is the same for the lack of evidence for any gods, which means there are no gods is one option. But there are other options, such as a god who does not interact with us, or the ancient Greek idea that gods can make themselves unknown to us until they want to show themselves.

But some of the evidence is more conclusive; such as a complex, intelligent first cause creator god is so improbable as to be unlikely. This still leaves an option for other definitions of a god, but the problem there is that the large amount of invented gods increases the chance that ALL gods are man made inventions.

Then we look at the findings of science, where it is always natural causes that create things, with no intelligent input required.

Which is why my position is that there probably are no gods, but I may be wrong.

[Itzpapalotl]

Does atheism have evidence that when one dies one ceases to exist? The answer is no, nor is there any reason why it should.

Atheism is a non-belief in god(s). That's it. You can't ascribe any other conditional beliefs to 'being an atheist' than that simple statement.

There are atheists that believe in souls and reincarnation and plenty who believe in some form of universal consciousness or another. This is because these beliefs do not hinge on the existence of god. So just because one is an atheist doesn't mean that they believe that one ceases to exist when they die.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

That when one dies one ceases to exist. The lights go out and all is quiet and you just become worm food. I’ve read this as an opinion. But no evidence has ever been presented. Just opinion. Can anyone help me out? Inquiring minds want to know.

Only indirect, using oblivion of consciousness temporarily and by inference from the inability of consciousness to exist without a matter -structure - though in discussion with Gaylenwoof who though it was reliably impossible for a consciousness to exists without a brain, I had to say that I thought it was not impossible for a mental particle pattern to exist after the brain was gone, but would need it to develop - which is why a god without substance seems physically impossible.

There is also no evidence of a soul. OOB's and NFRs are very interesting and may be the best case yet for life after death. But they may also be (like alien abductions) just a mental effect unrelated to an outside reality. Too early to say just yet.

By the way. The Religious assumption I've often heard - that is there is a soul, God has to be real, and if there is no soul, there is no God or gods, is incorrect. A Soul does not have to be linked with any gods or god, nor if there are no gods does it mean that we do not have one.

This is why after all the afterlife -claims, including faked messages from the afterworld are dealt with - atheism cannot say other than "I can't disprove it or rule it out, but there is no good reason to believe in it and so I do not believe it. That goes for a soul, afterlife and gods.

But - if there should be an afterlife - what I DO believe is that no one god is handing out entry tickets. I am utterly convinced that no man - made religion has dibs on eternal life. If there is an afterlife, it is one we all get, no matter what we did. The advantage of a Universe that has no morals is that Morals is not an arbiter in living after death. What's the point in retribution and revenge?

So if you are going to take Pascal's wager, and there is no choice between Christianity and Islam, since both have equally nasty hellthreats, bet on an atheist afterlife as if you are wrong, at least you didn't worship the wrong god, and you didn't wast your life doing it; and if you are right, you had a worthwhile life and an afterlife you didn't gave to grovel your way into.

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

Does grammar has rules?

Only man -made ones, like morality. So Gramma is relative and - according to Theistic thinking - there is no reason why people should not do as they like. (1)

But in fact, there is a good reason - we want to function in a society that uses the rules of grammor to be understood. This is why (long since when Gldrule was arguing that he could use words any way he liked) I devised the Humpty fallacy.

"Words mean what I want them to mean".

Which is fine - or rather not impossibly bad, if you explain what you mean by the words. Or Humpty will not be able to communicate with others who use the rules and will have only himself to blame.

It's the same with morals. The are man made and Relative, and Theists do not understand how humans society can have rules and meanings without a god imposing them. This is why Theist thinking is woefully hamstrung. The cannot think outside of Godfaith. Sorry - I take a stray ball and ran with it, but just give me half a chance. And it was a chance to explain humanist morality, and why it is valid and the argument from morality that I seen a lot of online recently is no argument for a god (even if one can agree which one) and ho argument against a relative morality.

(1) damn' - i left 'not out again. I'm always doing that and making nonsense (or A nonsense as the current grammatical fad has it) out of my sentences.