Now what? Serious question.
>>545054111just live life and do things you enjoy, but be decent. Only the worst fucking human beings need a "cop in the sky" to keep them moral. Also death is just nothing.. no pain, no nothing. Only pussies need a "heaven" to look forward to. Just live.. enjoy what the world has to offer.
>>545054570Morality is also a social construct. I am kind because I enjoy being kind. You are the same, but you should be honest with yourself about it. You cannot reason sadists into being compassionate. You only follow your own true will.
>>545054111> I think therefore I amThere you go. I just proved god exists.
>>545054981If solipsism is real, then you are god. Otherwise that is a proof of the existence of god.
>>545054850>the sun and the moon are social constructs
>>545055442The sun and the moon are physical objects. Saying the sun has a moral imperative to revolve counter-clockwise would be a social construct.
>>545054111It looks like there is a God.... but he doesnt do anything ever and you have to imagine him because well he is not really for you to see or somethingNow what?Serious question.
>>545054111Can you prove God doesn't exist?
>>545055794Can you prove that Gods don’t exist?
>>545055874No
>>545054111ban jews
>>545054111Then why aren't you looking in the right way?
>>545055794Logically, you can't prove God doesn't exist, or any negative.For example, we could spend eons mapping the entire universe and a theist could just dismiss the evidence with "God is purely metaphysical."On the other hand, a omnipotent God would have the power to make himself known to all beings in an instant and with no doubt.Thus, the "debate" is purely faith based. In other words, it makes no sense to argue about the matter.I would go as far as to say it makes no sense to even bother yourself with the question.>Does God exist?It is irrelevant.
>>545055979this. TKD
>>545054111Transhumanism seems likely. Going to stick an iphone in your head.On a more serious note, we should be trying to increase our lifespan to 120 years.
>>545056356>you can't prove God doesn't existI agree with everything you said leaf diogenes, but playing devils advocate, this double negative would seemingly imply that you can prove God exists
>>545054111enlighten others with the gift of truth
>>545057663What is truth?
>>545056356You cannot prove God exists through induction, but you can prove God exists through deduction. The "first mover" argument by Aquinas and Leibniz
>>545054111What if Superintelligence finds God?
>>545057798Niggers are cancer Kikes are cancer Jeets are cancer Fags raped kids Yids rape kids Trannies will never be a woman/man
>>545057544If someone held such proof, they could prove God does exist.You can't have proof to support the antithesis: "God doesn't exist."You aren't playing devil's advocate, I'm pretty sure I covered it and I actually agree with your statement.
>>545057802The first cause argument to prove the existence of God is fallacious.>There must a first unique cause>That's a godly attribute>Because we can deduce as such due to how the universe is built>And the universe is built in such a way that requires a first cause>There must be a first and unique cause>That's a godly attributeEtc.I cut a lot of corners, but you get the idea.Also, it implies there must be a first cause. Which isn't a necessity, despite what is claimed.
>>545054111>It looks likeStop looking in other men's colons.
