Hey you evolutionists...

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

I readily admit that my foundation is very shaky. I used to strongly advocate the view that people do not know nor can they know. But I felt that wasn't a very strong argument either.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Now this makes no sense

It is analogous to your argument.

You start with the assumption that god cares about you believing in him, even though there is no reason to believe that.

I start with the assumption that god cares about whether we permit the human race to continue, even though there is no reason to believe that.

My wager is, on the surface, just as likely to have a payoff as yours.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

I readily admit that my foundation is very shaky. I used to strongly advocate the view that people do not know nor can they know. But I felt that wasn't a very strong argument either.

The assertion of constant epistemological agnosticism is, taken to the extreme, completely valid. We do, however, have and require the ability to act on things that are so probable that no reasonable person could deny them.

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

The assertion of constant epistemological agnosticism is, taken to the extreme, completely valid. We do, however, have and require the ability to act on things that are so probable that no reasonable person could deny them.

elaborate?

Do you see the jump from epistemological agnosticism to Pascal's Wager? It doesn't seem like too big of a leap. I think I need to do more reserach into what I really believe.

 

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

The question I always ask myself is that if God is so loving and so powerful, why do innocent children get life threatening and debilitating diseases?

What is the argument? Tough Shit?

My sister has severe autism and brittle bones disorder. She has been injured so many times and injures herself more because she cannot communicate. She's never done anything wrong to deserve this kind of punishment, yet she is this way.

I can understand the whole, "well she's going to heaven" idea, but wouldn't it be better for her to go to heaven now? or as a little kid.

I just can't understand it.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

konechiwa: I`ll post again what I post every thread. This is roughly what Epicurus said:

Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?

 

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

konechiwa: I`ll post again what I post every thread. This is roughly what Epicurus said:

I want to know what Religious people will say.

Thank you for the philosophy lesson though //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

elaborate

An argument already posed several times in this thread is that nothing can be truly known. There always exists the possibility that we learn something new that changes the way we looked at everything else, or that everything we see is a deception (or a simulation in our mind, or any other idea that`s been proposed in the past).

In practice, however, there are a number of things that we can agree have such great certainty and probability that we can, and should, act as if they are true. For example, if we assume nothing is certain, we can assume that it is also possible that gravity is not real; maybe, like the Matrix, we can just turn it off by believing hard enough. But when you`re standing on top of a building, is it safe or reasonable to act as if it is not certain? We must assume what is reasonably probable is true, and act accordingly.

Do you see the jump from epistemological agnosticism to Pascal's Wager? It doesn't seem like too big of a leap. I think I need to do more reserach into what I really believe.

Pascal`s wager lives, and dies, by the sword of epistemological agnosticism.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

I want to know what Religious people will say.
Thank you for the philosophy lesson though //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

The religious have been trying to answer that for as long as `The Problem of Evil`has existed. Look up theodicy.

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

I find great difficulty in naming a belief system filled with "I don't knows..."

 

[bunkerking09 10+ year member]

i like this part

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Can you provide a transcript of the argument? I`m not watching another creationist video to hear the same arguments that I`ve already heard 100 times.

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

Can you provide a transcript of the argument? I`m not watching another creationist video to hear the same arguments that I`ve already heard 100 times.

FWIW, the first few experts represent religious schools. I listened to half of it and it seems like it's arguing for ID.

 

[bunkerking09 10+ year member]

statistics + physics

 

[bunkerking09 10+ year member]

FWIW, the first few experts represent religious schools. I listened to half of it and it seems like it's arguing for ID.

yes its arguing for intelligent design, the video is by lee strobel lol