HOME TheInfoList.com
Providing Lists of Related Topics to Help You Find Great Stuff
[::MainTopicLength::#1500] [::ListTopicLength::#1000] [::ListLength::#15] [::ListAdRepeat::#3]

picture info

Atheists
Atheism
Atheism
is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist.[5][6] In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[1][2][7][8] Atheism
Atheism
is contrasted with theism,[9][10] which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity exists.[10][11][12] The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)"
[...More...]

"Atheists" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Atheist (other)
An atheist is a person who does not believe in deities. Atheist or The Atheist may also refer to:Atheist (band), a U.S
[...More...]

"Atheist (other)" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Argument From Poor Design
The argument from poor design, also known as the dysteleological argument, is an argument against the existence of a creator God, based on the reasoning that an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God
God
would not create organisms with the perceived suboptimal designs that can be seen in nature. The argument is structured as a basic modus tollens: if "creation" contains many defects, then design is not a plausible theory for the origin of our existence
[...More...]

"Argument From Poor Design" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Argument From Free Will
The argument from free will, also called the paradox of free will or theological fatalism, contends that omniscience and free will are incompatible and that any conception of God that incorporates both properties is therefore inherently contradictory.[note 1][1][2] These arguments are deeply concerned with the implications of predestination.Contents1 Omniscience and free will 2 Freewill argument for the nonexistence of God 3 See also 4 Notes 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External linksOmniscience and free will[edit]If God made the game, its rules, and the players, then how can any player be free?Some arguments against the existence of God focus on the supposed incoherence of humankind possessing free will and God's omniscience. These arguments are deeply concerned with the implications of predestination. Moses Maimonides formulated an argument regarding a person's free will, in traditional terms of good and evil actions, as follows:… "Does
[...More...]

"Argument From Free Will" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

God Of The Gaps
" God
God
of the gaps" is a term used to describe observations of theological perspectives in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence. The "gaps" usage was made by Christian
Christian
theologians not to discredit theism but rather to point out the fallacy of relying on teleological arguments for God's existence.[1][2] Some use the phrase as a criticism of theological positions, to mean that God
God
is used as a spurious explanation for anything not currently explained by science.Contents1 Origins of the term 2 General usage 3 Usage in referring to a type of argument 4 Criticism 5 See also 6 References 7 Bibliography 8 External linksOrigins of the term[edit] The concept, although not the exact wording, goes back to Henry Drummond, a 19th-century evangelist lecturer, from his Lowell Lectures on The Ascent of Man
[...More...]

"God Of The Gaps" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Hitchens's Razor
Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor asserting that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim, and if this burden is not met, the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Overview[edit] The concept is named, echoing Occam's razor, for the journalist and writer Christopher Hitchens, who in a 2003 Slate article formulated it thus: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".[1][2] The dictum also appears in God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, a book by Hitchens published in 2007.[3] Hitchens's razor is actually an English translation of the Latin prover
[...More...]

"Hitchens's Razor" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Argument From Inconsistent Revelations
The argument from inconsistent revelations, also known as the avoiding the wrong hell problem, is an argument against the existence of God. It asserts that it is unlikely that God
God
exists because many theologians and faithful adherents have produced conflicting and mutually exclusive revelations. The argument states that since a person not privy to revelation must either accept it or reject it based solely upon the authority of its proponent, and there is no way for a mere mortal to resolve these conflicting claims by investigation, it is prudent to reserve one's judgment. It is also argued that it is difficult to accept the existence of any one God
God
without personal revelation. Most arguments for the existence of God
God
are not specific to any one religion and could be applied to many religions with near equal validity
[...More...]

"Argument From Inconsistent Revelations" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Argument From Nonbelief
An argument from nonbelief is a philosophical argument that asserts an inconsistency between the existence of God
God
and a world in which people fail to recognize him. It is similar to the classic argument from evil in affirming an inconsistency between the world that exists and the world that would exist if God
God
had certain desires combined with the power to see them through. There are two key varieties of the argument. The argument from reasonable nonbelief (or the argument from divine hiddenness) was first elaborated in J. L. Schellenberg's 1993 book Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason
[...More...]

"Argument From Nonbelief" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Omnipotence Paradox
The omnipotence paradox is a family of paradoxes that arise with some understandings of the term 'omnipotent'. The paradox arises, for example, if one assumes that an omnipotent being has no limits and is capable of realizing any outcome, even logically contradictory ideas such as creating square circles. A no-limits understanding of omnipotence such as this has been rejected by theologians from Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas
to contemporary philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Plantinga.[1] Atheological arguments based on the omnipotence paradox are sometimes described as evidence for atheism, though Christian theologians and philosophers, such as Norman Geisler and William Lane Craig, contend that a no-limits understanding of 'omnipotence' is not relevant to orthodox Christian theology
[...More...]

"Omnipotence Paradox" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Problem Of Evil
The problem of evil refers to the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil with an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God
God
(see theism).[1][2] An argument from evil attempts to show that the co-existence of evil and such a God
God
is unlikely or impossible. Attempts to show the contrary have traditionally been discussed under the heading of theodicy. Besides philosophy of religion, the problem of evil is also important to the field of theology and ethics. The problem of evil is often formulated in two forms: the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil
[...More...]

"Problem Of Evil" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Evil God Challenge
The Evil God Challenge is a thought experiment. The challenge is to explain why an all-good god should be more likely than an all-evil god. Those who advance this challenge assert that, unless there is a satisfactory answer to the challenge, there is no reason to accept God is good or can provide moral guidance.Contents1 Origin 2 The challenge 3 Criticisms and responses 4 See also 5 ReferencesOrigin[edit] Papers by Stephen Cahn,[1] Peter Millican,[2] Edward Stein[3] Christopher New,[4] and Charles B Daniels,[5] explored the notion of an 'anti-God'—an omnipotent, omniscient God who is all evil
[...More...]

"Evil God Challenge" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Problem Of Hell
The problem of Hell
Hell
is an ethical problem in religion in which the existence of Hell
Hell
for the punishment of souls is regarded as inconsistent with the notion of a just, moral, and omnibenevolent God. It derives from four key propositions: that Hell
Hell
exists; that it is for the punishment of people whose lives on Earth are judged to have sinned against God; that some people go there; and there is no escape.[1]Contents1 Issues1.1 Criticisms of the doctrines of Hell2 Judaism 3 Christianity3.1 Justice 3.2 Divine mercy4 Islam4.1 The inhabitants of Hell 4.2 Concerning predestination5 Proposed answers5.1 Annihilationism 5.2 Free will 5.3 Universal reconciliation6 Empty Hell
Hell
theory 7 See also 8 References 9 Further reading 10 External linksIssues[edit] There are several major issues to the problem of Hell
[...More...]

"Problem Of Hell" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Ultimate Boeing 747 Gambit
The Ultimate Boeing 747
Boeing 747
gambit is a counter-argument to modern versions of the argument from design for the existence of God. It was introduced by Richard Dawkins
Richard Dawkins
in chapter 4 of his 2006 book The God Delusion, "Why there almost certainly is no God". The argument is a play on the notion of a "tornado sweeping through a junkyard to assemble a Boeing 747" employed to decry abiogenesis and evolution as vastly unlikely and better explained by the existence of a creator god. According to Dawkins, this logic is self-defeating as the theist must now account for the god's existence and explain whether or how the god was created
[...More...]

"Ultimate Boeing 747 Gambit" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Anne Nicol Gaylor
Anne Nicol Gaylor
Anne Nicol Gaylor
(November 25, 1926 – June 14, 2015) was an American atheist and reproductive rights advocate. She co-founded the Freedom from Religion Foundation
Freedom from Religion Foundation
and an abortion fund for Wisconsin women. She wrote the book Abortion
Abortion
Is a Blessing and edited The World Famous Atheist Cookbook. In 1985 Gaylor received the Humanist Heroine Award from the American Humanist Association, and in 2007 she was given the Tiller Award by NARAL
NARAL
Pro-Choice America.Contents1 Biography 2 Abortion
Abortion
advocacy 3 Freedom From Religion Foundation 4 Death 5 Awards 6 ReferencesBiography[edit] Anne Nicol was born to Jason Theodore and Lucy Edna (née Sowle) Nicol on November 25, 1926, near Tomah, Wisconsin.[1] Her mother died when Anne was two years old
[...More...]

"Anne Nicol Gaylor" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

picture info

Baron D'Holbach
Paul-Henri Thiry, Baron d'Holbach
Baron d'Holbach
(French: [dɔlbak]), was a French-German author, philosopher, encyclopedist and prominent figure in the French Enlightenment. He was born Paul Heinrich Dietrich in Edesheim, near Landau
Landau
in the Rhenish Palatinate, but lived and worked mainly in Paris, where he kept a salon
[...More...]

"Baron D'Holbach" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo

Ibn Warraq
Ibn Warraq is the pen name of an anonymous author critical of Islam. He is the founder of the Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society and used to be a senior research fellow at the Center for Inquiry,[1][2][3] focusing on Quranic criticism.[4][5] Warraq is the Vice-President of the World Encounter Institute.[6] Warraq's commentary on Islam
Islam
is considered by some scholars to be overly polemical and revisionist[7][8] while others praise it as well-researched.[9][10] Warraq has written historiographies of the early centuries of the Islamic timeline and has published works which question mainstream conceptions of the period
[...More...]

"Ibn Warraq" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
.