Professor Falken Posted:
(I doubt any of the anti-religious nuts (which are just as bad as religious nuts) will take note of this, but it’s still worth a try.)
You can not objectively prove or disprove the existence of “God” or a “soul” AS A CONCEPT IN GENERAL. This is why:
You can not clearly and objectively define what these terms even mean. That’s a fact – just look at the sheer amount of religions, sects and interpretations. You’d be lucky if you get a matching definition from two people of the same religion.
If a theory can not be worded exactly, it can not be disproved (or proved, but you can’t prove a theory anyway). That’s a fact, too: How would you try to (dis)prove “X + Y = SOMETHING”? And if the theory you’re trying to prove is not objective… it’s the same with the data you find. If the basic underlining theory can be disputed and is open to interpretation… so is the evidence you can find. A “fuzzy” theory cannot be validated… or falsified. Boolean logic simply doesn’t WORK here.
We have no idea what “God” even is + We cannot do anything with an unclear defined theory -> Religious discussion from a rational point of view is ultimately futile.
QED.
You could probably disprove certain ridiculous definitions such as those that include omnipotence or omniscience.