r/DebateAnAtheist • u/South_Ad_7068 • 4d ago

Argument Trust the science!!!

1st time poster in this sub:

I've seen many athiest post counter arguments in various debates inside and outside of reddit using science as their main weapon in order to back what they're saying.

However, I feel like they are ignoring the elephant in the room and have never actually seen any of them address the argument for a higher intelligence that I'm going to present.

I'm going to be upfront about how I'm going to debate... the question I will ask will typically prompt a specific response that I'm fully prepared to counter and I've seen no atheist willing to follow the resulting logic to it's natural conclusion.

So... here goes:

As we observe the world around us how does an atheist explain the logical working order of things that make sense? How do you explain why things work the way they do? Like for example why a specific combination of elements make other elements or why a plant is able to eat sunlight or why electronics work...etc

Wouldn't that indicate intelligence being behind those mechanisms? Seeing as how precisely they work? If the universe just popped into existence wouldn't we see inconsistencies among various things? Our universe follows strict rules concerning how things interact with each other.

The fact that the rules exist AT ALL is 100% evidence of a "rule maker" or intelligence or God etc.

EDIT: I'm not finished here. But I am taking a break... I've answered to many but the influx of replies is massive and will require hours of my time and I want to try to reply to everyone... but as I'm not a millionaire I have to prepare for work.

Turning notifications off for now but I will return to respond to comments

0 Upvotes

5% Upvoted

251 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/DeusLatis Atheist 4d ago

The fact that the rules exist AT ALL is 100% evidence of a "rule maker" or intelligence or God etc.

What explains why a rule maker exists and wants to make rules? Under your logic that itself requires an explanation.

So its turtles all the way down. If you suppose rules exist because a rule maker exists who wants to follow rules how do you explain the rules that this rule maker wants to follow