21 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerI would need a reasonable explanation for the evidence against the existence of God, and it would have to be the case that the God hypothesis was the best explanation of the evidence I have for God's existence. In other words, it would need to be the case that the inverse probability of the evidence conditional upon the assumption of the truth of the God hypothesis was substantially higher than the probability of the evidence conditional upon alternative hypotheses.
OK. My mistake. You said that you would count it as evidence in favour of His existance.
So a further question: "Once you have evidence in favour of His existance, what would you then further need to believe in His existance?"
21 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrWhy do you hate god?
I would need a reasonable explanation for the evidence against the existence of God, and it would have to be the case that the God hypothesis was the best explanation of the evidence I have for God's existence. In other words, it would need to be the case that the inverse probability of the evidence conditional upon the assumption of the truth of the God hyp ...[text shortened]... stantially higher than the probability of the evidence conditional upon alternative hypotheses.
21 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerWell, that depends on what it means to 'know' and what 'you' means.
If you were to die, do you know where you would go?
I think it's most likely that my body will decay into different forms of matter. That part of myself which is known as personality will probably cease to exist.
However I understand other situations are possible.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
22 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrSo what do you regard as evidence against the existance of God?
I would need a reasonable explanation for the evidence against the existence of God, and it would have to be the case that the God hypothesis was the best explanation of the evidence I have for God's existence. In other words, it would need to be the case that the inverse probability of the evidence conditional upon the assumption of the truth of the God hyp ...[text shortened]... stantially higher than the probability of the evidence conditional upon alternative hypotheses.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
22 Jun 05
Originally posted by AThousandYoungSo are you willing to accept that some other situation is possible?
Well, that depends on what it means to 'know' and what 'you' means.
I think it's most likely that my body will decay into different forms of matter. That part of myself which is known as personality will probably cease to exist.
However I understand other situations are possible.
What then?
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrDream on ... 😉
I suspect that I'll return to that from whence I came. I doubt I will persist with anything like my current personality or identity, because these aspects of my mind are causally dependent upon my brain, which upon my death will be burned to ashes and dropped from a plane over Vatican City.
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckeri really don't understand why you keep making this fallacious argument; it only makes you look like an idiot.
Call it what you like. At least I have something. If I die and find out that I was wrong, then I lose nothing. I you die and find out that you were wrong, then you lose everything.
first of all, the argument is blatantly false: if your arbitrary god turns out to be an illusion, then why can't somebody else's 'arbitrary' god turn out to be real? his god will damn you for eternity to some alternate hell for being a 'non-believer'.
that's not really my main objection against your argument, however. more disconcerting (for you) is the fact that this argument makes your faith paper-thin, and it does so by your own admission. as a christian you are programmed to believe that you are entitled to some sort of afterlife with god where only truth, love, happiness prevail, blah blah blah. now you say that if you are wrong and no such afterlife exists, you have 'lost nothing'. interesting...by the property of transitivity, that implies that you think the afterlife you seek is nothing. nice job. moreover, you should know that believing in something just because you feel like you are playing the odds demonstrates a weak mind. you are hedging your future to maximize what you perceive as reward, but you are not really interested if you have found any truth in your belief system. that only makes you egotistical. and it makes you lazy because you have by your own admission given up on the search for truth -- you would rather just play the odds. how convenient.
i conclude that you are paper-thin and so is your faith. beware of scissors and strike-anywhere matches, dj2.
if you don't think my conclusion is justified: then explain how you can make the above argument (that you keep making) and not look like a complete idiot.