Who is the best atheist writer/philosopher on the existence of God? I am not interested in new atheism, le Reddit atheism, etc. A writer/philosopher who you think has substance. >inb4 nobody
>>24753050Nobody.> The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you. -Werner Heisenberg
>>24753584 Don't listen to this imbecile faggot, his dad kept him in the basement>>24753050Julian (pagan), Hume (not really atheist ig), Sade, Neech, Bataille, the existentialists.If you're looking for a solid proof there is no god, sorry you might want to stick to reddit atheism or just give up and join >>24753584 in his circlejerk
>>24753632>existentialists>First existentialist was a Catholic (Marcel)We win yet again.
>>24753652Yes, buddy, you win big. Ain't you just a big winner at live? Go celebrate it, go on, go brag to your priest or some shit, kneel in front of some plastic prints of Mary. Do not jerk off though, that would be really bad.
>>24753050
>>24753584>Werner HeisenBERGAlso, what "god" is waiting there? There's a million of them.
crazy how Christians read their book as literal, historical fact before hume, kant and hagel. after that they were forced to read them as parables and metaphors.talk about cope.
>>24754455>Why yes, I have never read Patristic or Scholastic Biblical commentaries, how did you know?
>>24754455It's a giant mess
>>24754434I wouldn't read into it too much
>>24753652First existentialist was a scandi prottie, thougheverbeit.
>>24753050The western canon after the enlightenment. Just read all of that. Tread carefully though, as you might turn into an atheist, like me, unfortunately.
Atheist philosopher is an oxymoron as the ancients said philosophy dealt with knowledge of God
Always love Christcucks talking about how there must be a god or life would be le pointless and muh morals dont exist anymore. And yet they dont answer as to why their specific god exists and not others>Bro he talked to me bro. I swear bro hes real I heard him talk to me bro
>>24754605The claim that there is no ground of being and that everything came out of nothingness is yet more absurd and simply untenable
there are actual athiest philosophers but they all basically come down to rejecting causality or some like basic part of human experience and at some level just being basically "incoherent" and the only reason they are taken at all seriously is because of our academic environment where we have to act like someone denying causality isn't just retardedI grew up totally secular and read my way into religion in my twenties and i promise it's genuinely just that. There is literally not a single person who has a common sense view of reality that is an athiest. They all deny things required in order to articulate philosophical views (individuated rational substances ie humans, causality, logic, etc.) I think some are insightful generally like Nieztsche but even he has a pretty bad understanding philosophically of the say classical/greek/Catholic view of natural theology and philosophy and how that relates to things like morality. I still think he is worth reading because of other things he is correct about though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoVDutpB4Cwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-80lQOlNOsfeser's conversation with oppy is a good example oppy is a respected athiest philosopher of religion and doesn't have the basic misunderstandings of natural theology that are pretty common but he still just lands on the things i talked about above. the pic rel book is much the same.Athiesm is really just kind of boring, it's either interesting but athiesm isn't really a good descriptor of it (like nieztsche) and isn't really hostile to thiesm or it is hostile to thiesm and is just some retarded science worshipper physicalist who thinks human consciousness is an illusion (and of course these people are just mechanized slaves of the technocrat machine who serves to ideologically project state power) and reading paul feyerbend is a good refutation of that it's really not terribly interestingAlso most religions/thiest writers writing on people like nieztsche are also just as retarded and incapable of understanding it and basically not worth reading
>>24754605There is only one God, every theist believes this. Only clueless atheists think that the theist claim is invalid due to multiple mythological deities of folk religionsIf you read mircea eliade for example you'll realize even those polytheistic cults started out as monotheistic. The infinitude of anthropomorphic deities by no means weakens the theist claim
>>24754628also following this I'd recommend reading people like Gabriel Marcel (man against mass society) and Heidegger (what is called thinking, question concerning technology, what is metaphysics, the essence of truth, etc.) to understand the actual nature of athiesm and the scientific/technological attitude (what most athiesm actually is)
>>24754455>>24754464They didn't, biblical literalism is a puritan concept, you just created a strawman, congratulations.
Bump
>>24754632It does when we can say that brahman emanates a multitude of forms.Why should I not accept that over your specific theistic formulation?
>>24753050The theist position is the easiest to argue against; the idea that any person has access to the mind or will of god and thinks they have the authority to tell other people is so absurd it is basically self refuting. In terms of the plausibility of the being existing at all, or at least the Christian conception of such a being, I would recommend Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason, Robert G. Ingersoll's Some Mistakes of Moses is a good case against the Biblical account as well, or, regarding more generally god or gods, Lucretius's On the Nature of the Universe is excellent as well. Psychologically speaking, Freud's The Future of an Illusion is another good one. I personally enjoyed the world superstition context that James Frazer provides with his The Golden Bough.At rock bottom, the idea of "god" is a psychological and sociological phenomenon. It is the realm of anthropology, something that humans invent and convince themselves of, not something that actually pertains to the mysteries of the universe itself.
>>24753584>Knowledge is super scary so if I pretend my protector daddy is at the bottom of it I can make myself feel betterThis is honestly just pathetic. Grow up and be a man. Discard childish illusion and believe only what is true, not what is comforting.
>>24754975>I have an objective basis for my worldview and morals>What? Oh, it's not written down literally, everyone has to interpret it for themselvesThis is the funniest form of theism. The lack of self awareness is hysterically amusing.
