There are no "back worlds" where God would stand

From Wikidebates
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Parent debateThis argument is used in the debate Does God exist?.
Argument forThis argument is a justification of No evidence of a god.
Keywords: God[ edit ].


If God and religions are true, this would presuppose an "afterworld" subsisting beyond the sensible world. It is in this world that God, angels, the souls of the dead, heaven and hell, etc. would exist. But there's no evidence of such a world - it's a pure invention.


“First proposition. The reasons for calling "this" world a world of appearance, on the contrary, prove its reality - another reality is absolutely indemonstrable. Second proposition. The distinctive signs we have given of the true "essence of things" are the characteristic signs of non-being, of nothingness; from this contradiction, we have built the "truth-world" into a true world: and it is indeed the world of appearances, as a moral optical illusion. Third proposition. To speak of a world "other" than this one makes no sense, assuming that we don't have within us a dominant instinct to slander, belittle and hold life in suspicion: in the latter case, we take revenge on life with the phantasmagoria of an "other" life, a "better" life.”

Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the idols.


Arguments forJustifications

Arguments againstObjections

  • Argument againstThere is a "world of Ideas" where mathematical concepts and moral values are held.
  • Argument againstThe laws of physics stand in a backwater
  • Argument againstNear-death experiences show an invisible reality
  • Argument againstShamanic experience shows the existence of invisible realities

Parent debateParent debate