Originally posted by Proper KnobI have no idea why you might deny the existence of God, you have no rational reason
A continuation of a debate originating in another thread -RC - Indeed, he knows deep down that God is there, hes simply in denial.
Why would i be in denial about Gods existence? Over to you Rob.
to deny the existence of God.
Originally posted by JS357my contention is that its a belief, like any other, in this instance, unsubstantiated, for it
I agree in the sense that if we think the existence of God is provable OR disprovable, we don't fully appreciate the concept of God.
it cannot be proven or dis-proven as you rightly say. All that he can state is that
appears to him that its improbable, which is simply not the same as saying, there is no
God.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBayesian theory says you're wrong.
my contention is that its a belief, like any other, in this instance, unsubstantiated, for it
it cannot be proven or dis-proven as you rightly say. All that he can state is that
appears to him that its improbable, which is simply not the same as saying, there is no
God.
http://yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOkay fair enough i'll clarify. I believe there is no God, of course i don't know for certain, but i find it extremely doubtful that the God you believe in exists and as a result he will not be appearing on earth.
my contention is that its a belief, like any other, in this instance, unsubstantiated, for it
it cannot be proven or dis-proven as you rightly say. All that he can state is that
appears to him that its improbable, which is simply not the same as saying, there is no
God.
Originally posted by Proper Knobwhat forms the basis of your belief dear PK?
Okay fair enough i'll clarify. I believe there is no God, of course i don't know for certain, but i find it extremely doubtful that the God you believe in exists and as a result he will not be appearing on earth.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou don't post the complete context of the post but I have seen this line of argument often
A continuation of a debate originating in another thread -RC - Indeed, he knows deep down that God is there, hes simply in denial.
Why would i be in denial about Gods existence? Over to you Rob.
enough to guess.
It is incredibly insulting as well as stupidly ignorant to claim that atheists really do think that
there is a god (and the specific one or ones the theist in question believes in) and that all
we are doing is throwing a temper tantrum and being a rebel in not believing in that god.
I don't quite know why some theists can't wrap their heads around the idea of non-belief
but it does seem to elude [some of] them.
One could postulate that deep down they know that god doesn't really exist and so are projecting
this onto their opponents... However such a claim would [without justifying evidence] be just as
unfounded and insulting as the theists claims.
It would be in keeping though with their standard "I'm rubber your glue" school of playground debating
tactics.
Originally posted by twhiteheadyes i have a rational basis for denying the existence of Santa clause, i caught my
Just as you have no rational reason to deny the existence of Santa Claus, yet deny it you do, you are really in denial deep down.
parents putting ot the presents one year, now where is your evidence for denying that
God exists, hmmm?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe basis of my belief is an evaluation with my mind after looking at the evidence. As i said to the Christians who knocked on my door, 'Which God? Every culture and civilisations has had it's own deity or deities, they can't all be right'.
what forms the basis of your belief dear PK?
In respect to this debate i'll refer to the literal Biblical God you believe in, and three points jump at me straight away -
1.Adam & Eve - a little interpretation of that allegory is pure nonsense.
2. The Flood - again, utter nonsense.
3. Evolution - my acceptance of the evidence is in complete contradiction to what your interpretation of God would have us believe.
That's for starters.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobie'Absence of evidence' IS 'evidence of absence' WHEN evidence would be expected if the proposition were correct.
yes i have a rational basis for denying the existence of Santa clause, i caught my
parents putting ot the presents one year, now where is your evidence for denying that
God exists, hmmm?
If god (your god) existed then there should be evidence for that gods existence.
There is none.
This is evidence for your gods non-existence.
(note evidence =/= proof)
Evidence in Bayesian terms is something that alters the probability of a proposition/hypothesis being correct.
The larger the shift in probability the stronger the evidence.
EDIT: Edited first sentence for clarity
4 edits
Robbie stated that the belief that there is no God could be a superstitious reason.
su·per·sti·tion; suprstn/ Show Spelled[soo-per-stish-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1. a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.
2. a system or collection of such beliefs.
3. a custom or act based on such a belief.
4. irrational fear of what is unknown or mysterious, especially in connection with religion.
5. any blindly accepted belief or notion.
So with this first site I found it would seem Robbie is correct.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell I suggest it is not a belief like any other. At the moment I am struggling to say in what way it is unlike any other belief, but it feels very different. And I think it should feel very different. It should feel so unlike any other belief that the normal reinforcers of belief, like evidence, are unimportant. The belief is just there. Although for me, it's not there.
my contention is that its a belief, like any other, in this instance, unsubstantiated, for it
it cannot be proven or dis-proven as you rightly say. All that he can state is that
appears to him that its improbable, which is simply not the same as saying, there is no
God.