Yes.

god is something absolutely useless.

I really need to read it.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/

I never believed in god. Whole country been atheist.

"We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence---which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. "

If there is no need for explanation, why are you a Marxist?

Should I not be for some reason?

Marx explains a lot, but if there is no need, then why make the exception?

Exception for what?

You said that God is useless because there is no need for explanation. So there is no need for explanation full stop. I can apply this dismissal to anything I don't like.

There is no need for it. But you can have it regardless of the absence of the objective need.

Marxism is contingent. <:troll_king:312064227542040576>

lol

There might be a subjective need.

It is different.

No need. Explanation is not necessary.

Objectively? No.

Are you completely objective?

Nope.

Then you might want some explanations due to your subjectivity.

Would you call that a need?

I would call it a timely matter. Subject there is and than there is no.

And with it the need for explanations is gone.

The need to have an active force, a mover with superpowers is a need to have a secured childhood. The child feels good and grows well.

It is natural to need it.

Nothing offensive in it.

Good reflexes.

So sometimes there is a need for explanation, when the subject calls upon it.

No objective need. But subjective, yes. With explanations child works better. Brain develops. Very healthy and favorable for evolution.

I agree with that.

So then here we are, at the intersection of explanations. I repeat the question, if the universe, and the things in it doesn't need to exist, why does it exist when it could have failed?