Why is the Question 'Does God exist' Invalid?

In Neurotheticism, the question “Does God exist?” is invalid because it arises not from a coherent, well-formed epistemic framework, but from a misapplication of evolved cognitive heuristics.

1. It Is Born of Cognitive Illusion, Not Epistemic Necessity

Humans evolved to detect agency, often where none exists (e.g. hearing a branch snap and assuming a predator). This hyperactive agent detection was adaptive in prehistoric environments, but it now generates metaphysical intuitions like gods, spirits, and unseen forces.

Thus, the God-question is not a rational inquiry but an evolutionary byproduct, a false positive of our cognitive survival systems.

2. It Presupposes a Coherent Referent (“God”)

To ask “Does X exist?” meaningfully, X must refer to something conceptually coherent. But: “God” is often defined as beyond time, space, causality, or comprehension. These definitions undermine the question’s intelligibility, making God unfalsifiable and logically elusive. The term “God” often collapses under scrutiny, either into undefined abstraction, circular logic, or empty semantics.  

Therefore, Neurotheticism denies that “God” names a valid target of inquiry.

3. It Smuggles in Hidden Assumptions

The question “Does God exist?” assumes:

• That existence is a meaningful predicate when applied to metaphysical constructs.

• That the universe could, or should, contain intentional supernatural agency.

• That human cognitive architecture is reliable enough to grasp such entities if they existed.

Neurotheticism rejects all of these assumptions as unexamined residues of evolved mental shortcuts, not as philosophically justified premises.

4. It Is Not Falsifiable or Epistemically Resolvable

Any question that cannot be: Empirically tested, or Logically clarified in a non-circular way, fails to meet the criteria of a valid epistemic question. The God-question lives in the realm of perpetual irresolvability, kept alive by linguistic ambiguity and psychological intuition.

5. It Sustains a False Dichotomy

By asking whether God exists, we accept a binary that shapes theism, atheism, and agnosticism. But Neurotheticism argues:

• This binary is itself a construct—framing a non-question as a fundamental one.

• Both belief and disbelief are responses to a question that should never have been asked.

In Summary:

Neurotheticism holds that “Does God exist?” is invalid because:

• It emerges from evolutionary cognitive misfiring (not rational inquiry),

• It lacks a coherent referent,

• It contains unexamined metaphysical assumptions, 

• It cannot be resolved by evidence or logic, and

• It misframes the nature of epistemic responsibility.

It is not a deep question. It is a mirror reflecting our cognitive biases, a question that seems profound only because it exploits the architecture of the human mind.