I Know That God Does Not Exist

But there was a rational reason to think that it did exist.
That is why they were looking for it.Someone didn't just wake up one morning and say "I think there is an undiscovered 'particle' that exists.
They followed a rational reasoned argument that indicated that the Higgs existed.

Which puts you in the position of saying that you do not know anything about what is (or is not) on the McD's menu.
This is philosophically fine (I suppose) but everyone will look at you with incredulity when you say that you do not know if/if not McD's sell heroine or donkeys or planets.It also puts you in the position of not being able to say that you know anything.

Can you provide a definition of knowledge that you would agree with?

But you don't know that.
You don't even know if you have ever baked a cake in the past as those memories could have been implanted.
And the next time you go to bake a cake you might find that you have forgotten.You (according to your logic) do not know anything - because you can imagine unfounded reasons for your knowledge to be wrong.

I don't think so. But there is no reason to test.
There is no reason to suppose that god exists.
But there were reasons to think that the Higgs existed. That the Higgs does not exist.
(It would not stop at that though, as there are still reasons to think that a Higgs-like particle exists.) Which means that anything could exist and you are left not being able to know anything but can suggest any random thing you wish.I think there is a dragon in my lounge but evidence of its existence is not yet forthcoming?
I think that would be a irrational claim.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

We should confine ourselves to those claims that are reasonable.
(It was reasonable to claim that a Higgs-like particle existed.)
You would prefer that we made unreasonable claims?Certainly, if you want to run off and investigate (e.g.) the spaghetti monster, then go ahead.
But the fact that you are investigating the spaghetti monster does not lend credence to it existing. I don't agree. I am not saying: "I cannot explain or understand this, therefore it cannot be true."
I am saying: "There is no evidence that a god exists."
Do you think that me saying: "There are no dragons in my lounge." is an argument from incredulity also?I am not denying any evidence: there is none.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

There is also a lack of inconspicuous evidence, possibly expected evidence and also unexpected evidence.But, yes, that is what I meant by "there is none".

Do you mean this guy...? Yeah - it must have been difficult to imagine...erm...a big flying man. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Unless you await each morning with a sense of trepidation, then you are equivocating with the word 'know' again.
Please re-read the opening post.

*Given up arguing with Ringo's special pleading*...or have I?Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

The third time's the charm? I doubt it.

In your view, is there anything that does not exist?Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

You appear to be applying different criteria when declaring what you know and what you don't know. But dinosaurs could exist in a hidden valley in the Amazon or on a different planet.
You have not looked everywhere for dinosaurs yet.
Until you do, you cannot claim they do not exist. Because you haven't looked everywhere for fluorescent ants?
Until you do, you cannot claim they do not exist?And again: But there could be rock-like creatures (ala Apollo 18) living on the surface of Mars.
You have not looked everywhere on Mars for large land dwelling organisms.
Until you do, you cannot claim they do not exist. Because you haven't looked everywhere on Mars for life?
Until you do, you cannot claim it does not exist?Your position seems contradictory. :SEdited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

(I'll switch the example to 'red swans', since (I think) we know black swans exist.) But dinosaurs could exist somewhere on earth.
You haven't looked everywhere, so you can't claim they don't. But inductive logic is used all the time by science.
To say that a scientific claim is invalid because it is based on previous experiences undermines most of science. So - do red swans exist, then?
We have never found one and ornithologists will confidently claim that they know red swans don't exist.
But there is nothing stopping them from existing. But our judgement of what is impossible is based on our current knowledge.
You haven't learnt all about everything, so you can't claim red swans are impossible.
Maybe red swans are only impossible via natural means.
But maybe some scientist mutated a swan into being red - you don't know. I disagree. Science can show (for example) that prayer doesn't work.
Science can look at many examples of proposed evidence of god and say "This is not evidence of god".
(In fact, it has done so. Many times. e.g. Lightning is not caused by Thor.) And by the same logic, there is very little that can't exist.
As long as it is internally consistent (i.e. is not an invisible pink unicorn), then there is nothing stopping it from existing.
Can you give me an example of something that can't exist?Dinosaurs: could exist, but are currently undiscovered.
Red swans: could exist, but are currently undiscovered.
Large lifeforms on Mars: could exist, but are currently undiscovered.
(But at least we have evidence that something similar does exist/has existed.)Can you think of anything that could not exist, using your "No evidence for it and no evidence against it means it could exist"?
Because using that logic, I see nothing stopping fairies, goblins, invisible dragons and Santa Claus from existing.

We have people saying that god is undefined, and if something is undefined then we can't know anything about it - despite them happily defining their own god.We have had people that say that they know almost nothing. (If true, I don't think their opinion has much weight.)We have had people say that if we can't find an elephant in a room then that is not evidence of an absence of elephants in that room.We have had people say that they don't know that the sun will rise tomorrow.
'Nuff said.I think Mod said it most succinctly: Is there an unevidenced and undefined thing somewhere?
LOLIs there a god?
No.