For the sake of argument, that “God Proofs” do not work to…

For the sake of argument, that “God Proofs” do not work to…

-For the sake of argument, that “God Proofs” do not work to

establish God’s existence. Does this matter? Logically it does not follow that God does not exist, but only that a specific line of reasoning is faulty or flawed in some way. Shouldn’t “faith” or a non-rational element be just as important as a purely rational demonstration (which is like a math proof in a void)? Many folks are religious and do not care about proofs. On the other hand, some nonreligious types, like Bertrand Russell, care a great deal about logic proofs.

-Albert Camus is one of the most iconic figures within Existential philosophy (even though he refused the title and said he was NOT an existentialist).His portrait of The Myth of Sisyphus is thought to be the creme de la creme example of the human condition conceptualized as “absurd.” Does this myth strike you as an absolutely perfect example of absurdity, as it does Richard Taylor? Is the film Woman in the Dunes just as good of an example? If a better example of the absurd comes to your mind, express that view.