Axiological/axiology (value theory/value science) Atheism?

 If a god anything was real and good it would not be the harmful world we have. Therefore, no god is good but as gods are often claimed as good so no such gods exist. This is an axiological atheist argument also called the argument from evil. Philosophic Axiology (value theory) and Scientific Axiology (formal axiology) Formal Axiology: Another Victim in Religion’s War on Science Axiological atheism/axiology atheism (aka value theory atheism/value science atheism):   Axiological Atheism can be thought to involve ethical/value theory reasoned and moral argument driven apatheism, ignosticism, atheism, anti-theism, anti-religionism, secularism, and humanism.   My quick definition of Axiology is a philosophy (value theory) and a social science (formal axiology) which mainly involves the “what, why, and how” of “value” the way epistemology approaches “knowledge” as in what is of value/good/worth/beneficial/ or useful? Why is the thing in question of value/good/worth/beneficial/ or useful? How should the value, good, worth, beneficial, or useful be interacted with? *Philosophic Axiology (value theory) Axiology as philosophy, value theory/the theory of values, meta-ethics/morality or aesthetics.   Value theory encompasses a range of approaches to understanding how, why, and to what degree person’s value things; whether the object or subject of valuing is a person, idea, object, or anything else. Intuitively, theories of value must be important to ethics. This investigation began in ancient philosophy, where it is called axiology or ethics.  Ref   *Scientific Axiology (formal axiology)   Axiology as science, formal axiology/the theory of values, meta-ethics/morality or aesthetics.   Formal axiology is a branch of axiology in general. Axiology in general or “as such” is value theory in all its...

RELIGIONS KILL PEOPLE???

Most religions in the world have and/or are killing people. Just think of all the wars fought between religions and in the religions, themselves, lots of people were killed. In those wars so many people died in both sides to protect their god but the god did not protect them. In other words, all the people killed religion or gods was the driving reason. In ancient times, the notion of a divine “division of labor” ruler or slave as well as oppressor and the oppressed. And while early empires could be described as henotheistic, i.e. dominated by a single god of the ruling elite (as Morduch in the Babylonian empire, Assur in the Assyrian empire, etc.), or more directly by defining the ruler in an imperial cult, the concept of “Holy War” enters a new phase with the development of monotheism, with a divine “division of labor” took the control of one’s life, almost every aspect was now to be controlled by the god, the religion, the priest, the king. Monotheism is distinguished from henotheism, a religious system in which the believer worships one god without denying that others may worship different gods with equal validity, and monotheism-centrism or single god theistic preference and the god they choose is the only god they believe one can or should choose, the recognition of the existence of many gods but with the consistent worship of only one deity. The broader definition of monotheism characterizes the traditions of Bábism, the Bahá’í Faith, Cao Dai (Caodaiism), Cheondoism (Cheondogyo), Christianity, Deism, Eckankar, Hindu sects such as Shaivism and Vaishnavism, Islam, Judaism, Mandaeism, Rastafari, Seicho...

You will always fail to prove a specific god?

You will always fail to prove a specific god?   Religion is big on claims but small of real reasoning. Take the Abrahamic faiths they propose a very specific well defined god but are fond of a very unspecified god of naturalistic inferred theistic creationism or intelligent design. In other words when pressed to demonstrate god in the world or as the reason for the big bang they can only at best try and surmise a magical power or unknown and unknowable possible something as the “creator” but how does that do a thing to prove any specific anything. So even if we were to concede for the sake of argument that some god phantom menace started things they still have to show it’s their very specific claimed god. But the issues don’t stop there, as they also would have to prove or give warrant as well as justification for every attribute and claimed character trait attached to their specific god using only nature arguments, not some holy book or otherworldly revelation. The truth is for all the appeals to nature for god they do, not one is valid in anyway to confirm that their god and only their god is true, they must always leave the facts and return to faith. Thus they always will fail to show any naturalistic reasons for believing their special needs god. What they show instead is a belief not in the god of some myth or scriptures but belief in a projected somethingism god attributed to nature which is indistinguishable from a nothingism godless reality attributed by nature.   Theological Noncognitivist &...