Faith selector

[Drake Tungsten]

You don't see the problem with assuming that your experiences as a human being somehow provide you with any sort of insight into the existence and workings of an omnipotent God? That's a bit arrogant, to say the least...

[Ramo]

Sure, why not? I rely on my previous experiences to evaluate the nature of reality (do you honestly believe it's just as likely that you're in a "Matrix" situation as not?). My experiences are better to go on than anything else.

[Drake Tungsten]

My experiences are better to go on than anything else.

True, but there are numerous questions for which your experiences as a human being are utterly worthless in any search for the truth. I think that Boris and I are saying that the existence of God is one of these questions and that a truly wise person would know better than to try and know the unknowable. [/daoism mode]

[Ethelred]

Experience as a human being DOES give us ample evidence that humans can believe in things they made up. I don't see how pointing this out can be construed as arrogance.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
You don't see the problem with assuming that your experiences as a human being somehow provide you with any sort of insight into the existence and workings of an omnipotent God? That's a bit arrogant, to say the least...

Arrogant, maybe, but pragmatic nonetheless. There are lots of things that I don't know and/or cannot prove, but it's impossible to incorporate all of that doubt into my worldview and still function as a rational human being. The best that I can do is to keep an open mind in debates or during mental masturbation. (How do I know that I really exist, f'rinstance? Answer: I certainly can't prove it, but I'll be damned if I'll even consider the integration of any doubt of the matter into my worldview. It's simply not feasible to live one's life in accordance to the assumption that you don't exist.) Pascal's Wager (when modified) has some practical use: if it's not possible or practical to live one's life according to a certain set of assumptions (like the assumption that nothing exists), then said assumptions are anathema. Metaphysical beliefs regarding God (the belief in god(s), the belief in no-god, or the lack of either belief) are all practically feasible, though, since ethics (which are necessary to functional living) are not necessarily reliant on metaphysics (which are not).

In other words, Wutang is for the children.

[Ramo]

True, but there are numerous questions for which your experiences as a human being are utterly worthless in any search for the truth. I think that Boris and I are saying that the existence of God is one of these questions and that a truly wise person would know better than to try and know the unknowable.

I'm not saying I *know* if whether there's a God, merely that, based on my experiences, it's improbable that a God exists.

[Drake Tungsten]

There are lots of things that I don't know and/or cannot prove, but it's impossible to incorporate all of that doubt into my worldview and still function as a rational human being.

Good point. However, I don't see the need to eliminate all doubt in one's life. I'm comfortable with an element of uncertainty in my worldview. I'll make basic assumptions (like my own existence), but when you get to grand issues like the existence of God, I prefer to not make any sort of assumption. I don't believe that my own senses and reasoning ability are up to the task of deciphering such a complex issue, so I just choose to leave it alone. Seems to be the pragmatic course, in my eyes.

In other words, Wutang is for the children.

I think that we're in complete agreement on this.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm not saying I *know* if whether there's a God, merely that, based on my experiences, it's improbable that a God exists.

I'm just saying that your experiences are a completely worthless tool in regards to a problem like this. It's like a kindergartener claiming to understand string theory...

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Ramo


I'm not saying I *know* if whether there's a God, merely that, based on my experiences, it's improbable that a God exists.

Now that one I don't see. Where DO your experiences show this? In what way? HOW THE HECK?

Now I can say that based on my experiences it highly probable that all gods that humans follow or don't follow are just human inventions. However that doesn't mean that there isn't actually a supreme being of some sort, after a Greek came up with atoms long before their was evidence for them so human imagination can by accident get things right occasionally.

Still I find a Universe without a Creator at least as probable as a God without a Creator. A little more probable at that since I can see the Universe so I know that it exists.

I am severly short on evidence for the Giant Invisible Orbiting Aadvark however. The GIOA by the way is much better than a unicorn. No one can say that you or I just invented it. I got it from someone else.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Good point. However, I don't see the need to eliminate all doubt in one's life. I'm comfortable with an element of uncertainty in my worldview.

Oh absolutely, you should never be locked into your worldview, and it's an ethical imperative to take other worldviews into account when considering your actions.

I'll make basic assumptions (like my own existence), but when you get to grand issues like the existence of God, I prefer to not make any sort of assumption.

I agree there also, but "not making any assumption" usually equates to "not believing in God" in terms of one's worldview. When asked the questions "Do you believe that God exists" and "Do you believe that God doesn't exist," I answer "No" to both questions, but as a result my worldview doesn't incorporate God into it. I'm not exactly a smeg-head like Logical Realist (or DialecticMaterialist), but I'm still not a "believer."

I think that we're in complete agreement on this.

Indeed. Who but the Soy Bomb has the power to challenge the Wutang?

[Ramo]

Now that one I don't see. Where DO your experiences show this? In what way? HOW THE HECK?

I've had no experience with any God, nor have I heard of any credible observation of a God, so I think it's reasonable to assume that such a thing does not exist.

I'm just saying that your experiences are a completely worthless tool in regards to a problem like this. It's like a kindergartener claiming to understand string theory...

Like I said, that may be true, but there's nothing better to go on.

[Drake Tungsten]

I agree there also, but "not making any assumption" usually equates to "not believing in God" in terms of one's worldview. When asked the questions "Do you believe that God exists" and "Do you believe that God doesn't exist," I answer "No" to both questions, but as a result my worldview doesn't incorporate God into it.

I don't disagree with you. I also don't think that Boris is really in disagreement with you over anything but the definition of the word "atheist". Boris is using the more common definition, while you are using a more strict one. I think both of you guys are correct, as both definitions of atheist are legitimate. What I can't figure out is what you guys are actually arguing about...

Indeed. Who but the Soy Bomb has the power to challenge the Wutang?

Against the combined powers of the Wutang, only Soy Bomb may stand. Others may challenge individual Wu members, but when assembled, the collective Wutang Clan is nigh invincible. May the Soy Bomb bathe us in his protective light for all eternity...

[Drake Tungsten]

Like I said, that may be true, but there's nothing better to go on.

I've never understood the need many people have that requires them to have an opinion on any topic, no matter how little information they actually have on the subject. What's wrong with just admitting that you don't know?

[Ramo]

What about my invisible unicorn? Do you think it's equally probable that it exists as not?

Do you think it's equally probable that you're connected to a "Matrix" system as not.

The point is if there is no evidence for the existence of something, it likely does not exist. Ockham's razor and so forth...

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
What I can't figure out is what you guys are actually arguing about...

I'm trying to figure out whether it's possible to incorporate as much doubt into one's worldview as Boris (apparently) claims to do, or whether Boris doesn't actually incorporate very much doubt into his worldview, or whether (unknown) alternative C is the case. In other words, is it possible/feasible to incorporate "the assumption of equal probability for God's existence and God's non-existence" (I'll point out that I'm probably paraphrasing here) into one's worldview?

May the Soy Bomb bathe us in his protective light for all eternity...

At least until the menace of Bob Dillon is eliminated...