Think of the tooth fairy. That body is one that can sense the loss of a tooth from anywhere and somehow magically break into houses and buy gifts, meaning that body has a gigantic sum of money? Must know a lot. Most don’t believe that being exists at all due to the absurdity of the conditions which are certainly below 1.
Well, what about the omnipotent God, who claims that he is infinitely powerful. Each of his powers are likely below 100% to exist, yet the definition is that he has infinite powers. He has even more conditions than the tooth fairy.
Thus I think I was am atheist logically by design, but of course you can disagree with me.
Statistically, the more conditions that an entity has to fulfill, the lower the chance it actually exists. God is the limit of this… it is 0<= P(Condition) < 1. P(Condition)^Infinity limit is 0. Mathematically, God is impossible to exist.
“God is above math and logic itself” Well for this argument, you have to assume that 1. God exists 2. God is above math and logic
And given a world God exists, God has a probability of 1 to exist by the definition of the condition, and this does not care about the possibility that God doesn’t exist in the first place.
In fact so many "counterarguments" to non-god assume that there is a god, assume that the historical books are true, which may not be the case
Both sides have near-zero good evidence.
HOWEVER,
Like fairies, I will assume they don’t exist until there is evidence FOR existence, not just evidence AGAINST NON-EXISTENCE, leading towards skepticism and burden of proof.
Let’s say there is a species of flying time-traveling fairy “FTTF” that came from 9,999,000 years away from now, that is invisible, and absolutely undetectable, and learned how to time-travel without causing disruption to past events, and can also manipulate the momentum of all the stars and atoms beyond the constraints of the observable universe with methods beyond quantum mechanics.
Theoretically, if people wanted to prove its existence or
absence
as FTTF species are unable to be detected within the limits of
scientific research, you technically cannot target them in any way using
science as there is zero sample, and gives absolutely no data as 0/0 is
indefinite (can be 0, can be 0.5, can be 1…), resulting in a null
hypothesis. Yet most say that that sounds absurd, and Occam’s razor would say
that there are too many conditions.
Arbitrary statistical inferences from arbitrary statistical numbers incoming… but still, no matter what, the chances of these are really low. This is perhaps to illustrate concepts.
Fairies exist: 0.33
Can time-travel perfectly = 0.005
Invisible YET unlike air cannot be detected under ANY science = 0.001
Can manipulate stars outside observable universe = 0.0000001 (absurd) (0.33) x (0.005) x (0.001) x (0.0000001) = 0.000000000000165
Now Let’s take God himself as a theory:
Enough energy to make universe: 0.00000000001
All-powerful (can do anything): 0.00000000000000001
All-knowing: 0.000000000001
All-loving: 0.1
Above the laws of physics: 0.000000000001
Omnipresense: 0.00000000001
= 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 (10^-64). Number analogy: Smaller than randomly picking the same grain of sand four times, or my entire family getting murdered by a serial killer
This is too low, so I will take that as negligible. Rationally, I analytically take the most probable stance as atheism and live by the assumption that there is no supernatural God.
Under pragmatic rationality principles, this is so low, that I will just assume it to be zero due to negligible difference. In fact, the chances of me being suddenly assassinated when I go outside is exponentially higher than this, yet I still live my life assuming that I won’t be killed the moment I step out of my front door.
Let’s say the chance of any entity fulfilling a non-natural trait is 0.999 (generous estimate that is way higher than what it actually is) Yet, God is said to have infinite conditions So lim x->infinity 0.999^x -> 0. So, if he truly has infinite power God has zero chance of existing! It's too complex!
Counterarguments: 1. Math was created by God so God is higher than
math. However, the idea that math could even suggest "God" may not exist
means he did not make us perfect.
2. God is the comparison itself that is higher than all of mankind, so
as he fulfills all the conditions by definition, he is 1.
However, this assumes God is the perfect thing in the first place making
a circular argument
But God is explicitly defined as not being created and having
everything, so probability can actually be 1, as theoretically if the
sole creator lacked a trait, humans wouldn't even know of it anymore as
it does not exist within reality itself.