0

It seems to me that in order to prove that God does not exist, we need to be like the God himself: the supreme being, infinite in the knowledge of the universe. If my logic is correct, that sounds like a paradox.

9
  • It is hard to assert that we can prove either G's existence or G's non-existence... Having said that, the fact that we cannot prove G's non-existence does not mean that we have proved G's existence. Sep 20 at 12:52
  • In principle a proof is a human "construct"; thus, it must be finite. Sep 20 at 12:56
  • 1
    "Infinity is also a human construct, and it's infinite. " Assume so: thus, we - finite humans - have a grasp of the "infinite" concept (see mathematics). Thus, we have also a grasp of the concept of an infinite God and we are finite. In conclusion: we can "manage" concepts involving infinite. Sep 20 at 13:13
  • 1
    No. Proof only relates to the domain of valid inferences of defined abstractions, ie logic & math, so not pertaining to existence which is only determined observationally. What we can say is 'God Is Not A Good Theory' youtu.be/ew_cNONhhKI (physicist Sean Carroll's talk on that topic)
    – CriglCragl
    Sep 20 at 16:34
  • 1
    Depends on what "prove" means. If it means absolute certainty then we cannot "prove" anything at all, not even mathematical theorems. After all, our logic can be faulty. If it means something more humanly relevant, like proving some theory experimentally, then why not? Physicists plausibly proved that aether does not exist, so why not God? Or if we prove logically that a notion of God is self-contradictory then we will prove that such God does not exist.
    – Conifold
    Sep 20 at 19:35
2

If a particular formulation/definition of God entails a logical contradiction then that would be a way to prove that that God does not exist.

4
  • ???............ Sep 20 at 15:54
  • @MauroALLEGRANZA One could formulate a definition of God that is internally logically inconsistent. Someone else could find a finite proof to demonstrate that inconsistency. That would show that the god proposed by the first person cannot exist (despite being "infinite" in one or more aspects).
    – Dave
    Sep 20 at 16:02
  • Please do not post comments as answers.
    – Conifold
    Sep 20 at 20:43
  • 2
    @Conifold this is an answer in that it provides a finite way to disprove various kinds of proposed gods, whether those gods involved “infinite” properties of one kind or another.
    – Dave
    Sep 21 at 13:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.