08 Jan 08
Originally posted by bbarrWhat were you expecting , an apparition of some sort?
I've been walking around for the past hour waiting for my hypothetical posit that God exists to come to evidential fruition. It has been a nice walk, and it is beautiful outside, but I had a beautiful walk yesterday without the posit. KM, your help here would be appreciated.
How did you feel inside? Did your spirit feel lifted?
08 Jan 08
Originally posted by LemonJelloFind a quiet spot , relax , still your mind and ask in whatever faith you might be able to for God to show you something or give you an image or word of some sort. He might give you a specific dream that night for example or a particular word.
[b]Any scientist knows that in order to find something out one needs to test a hypothesis via an experiment.
How should I set up and run the experiment to test the proposition that God exists? Please be specific in your instructions. I found the "God's wager" to be too vague to help me out here because I'm not sure what it means for one to "dare to seek God".[/b]
The chances are that you have already felt his presence at some point in your life without realising what it was. You could ask God to remind you of such an experience and bring it to mind.
08 Jan 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterI was looking for a sign of some sort, internal or external. But I've seen nor felt nothing of the sort.
What were you expecting , an apparition of some sort?
How did you feel inside? Did your spirit feel lifted?
No, but I'm generally pretty calm and happy to begin with. Should I wait until I'm miserable to start looking?
08 Jan 08
2 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterWell, your instructions are basically for me to find a quiet spot, relax, and then start addressing God. I'm not comfortable with this experiment already because the proposition we are supposed to be testing is that God exists. Thus, I feel like the instruction you have given me is in a sense question-begging since the supposition that he exists seems implicit in the instruction.
Find a quiet spot , relax , still your mind and ask in whatever faith you might be able to for God to show you something or give you an image or word of some sort. He might give you a specific dream that night for example or a particular word.
The chances are that you have already felt his presence at some point in your life without realising what it was. You could ask God to remind you of such an experience and bring it to mind.
Please revise accordingly.
08 Jan 08
This probably was mentioned before, but I think you take a somewhat static view of how beliefs are formed.
If at any point in time somebody points out the pragmatic reasons of believing in God, then I think that one is consciously unable (at least for a vast majority) to will oneself into changing beliefs. That we certainly can agree with.
However, this information lies in your subconscious, as well. With time, this subconscious information can certainly affect how you weight the different information that you have.
I think that this is related with a slightly larger proportion of dying people becoming religious or with the (obviously hyperbole, but with a grain of truth) saying that there are no atheists in foxholes.
There might be no immediate result in a debate such as this, but that doesn't mean that there is no long-run effect of such pragmatic considerations.
08 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterKM, what are some predictions that I could test? These might be of the form "If it were true that God exists, then []".
Find a quiet spot , relax , still your mind and ask in whatever faith you might be able to for God to show you something or give you an image or word of some sort. He might give you a specific dream that night for example or a particular word.
The chances are that you have already felt his presence at some point in your life without realising what it was. You could ask God to remind you of such an experience and bring it to mind.
What are the [] here, what should I be looking for or trying to observe? Which ones should I look for that are particularly strong in supporting some sort of abductive reasoning toward the God hypothesis?
Also, what conditions would count as falsification for the hypothesis?
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by LemonJelloThis seems a silly thing to say. If a scientist is testing for the existence of a certain particle then he starts with the supposition that such a particle might possibly exist. Why should it be different with God? I see no logical reason why a search for God should not entail at least some hypothesis that he might actually exist , infact I could argue that a search that took place with the supposition that he definitely doesn't exist is likely to end up being a fruitless search.
Well, your instructions are basically for me to find a quiet spot, relax, and then start addressing God. I'm not comfortable with this experiment already because the proposition we are supposed to be testing is that God exists. Thus, I feel like the instruction you have given me is in a sense question-begging since the supposition that he exists seems implicit in the instruction.
Please revise accordingly.
You seem to think that I am suggesting that you believe that God exists before you even start the experiment. This is not what I have said. I am suggesting that you have at least a tentative working hypothesis that God might exist and then conduct the experiment according to this.
It's not rocket science.
09 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterPlease read more carefully. I didn't say you started with the supposition that God "might possibly exist" (or that this was the problem). I said implicit in your instruction is the supposition that God does exist -- this being question-begging since this is the proposition we are supposed to be testing.
This seems a silly thing to say. If a scientist is testing for the existence of a certain particle then he starts with the supposition that such a particle might possibly exist. Why should it be different with God? I see no logical reason why a search for God should not entail at least some hypothesis that he might actually exist , infact I could argu od might exist and then conduct the experiment according to this.
It's not rocket science.
You instucted me to address God -- for instance, you suggested I ask him to remind me of stuff. Again, my concern is that in doing this I would already basically be supposing he exists. Surely you can revise in order to alleviate my concern.
I am suggesting that you have at least a tentative working hypothesis that God might exist and then conduct the experiment according to this.
The proposition you challenge me to test is "God exists". Yes of course I will work here under the supposition that he might exist, that it's possible he exists. Now, what is the revised experiment?
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by LemonJelloOk , so ask God to do all or some of the things I am suggesting under the supposition that he might exist. If he doesn't then you will just be talking to thin air and the worst that will happen is your neighbours might think you a bit strange. If he does then something else might happen .
Please read more carefully. I didn't say you started with the supposition that God "might possibly exist". I said implicit in your instruction is the supposition that God does exist -- this being question-begging since this is the proposition we are supposed to be testing.
You instucted me to address God -- for instance, you suggested I ask him to re ...[text shortened]... he might exist, that it's possible he exists. Now, what is the revised experiment?
I fail to see how you can conduct an experiment of this sort without supposing at some level that God might exist. Maybe some more specific help might be more appropriate? A common prayer amongst converting christians is "God , if you are really there then......" This prayer allows for a tentative faith in a God that might exist but also honours the doubt that is there also. It's the best , most honest compromise in a situation like this and may allow you to conduct the experiment whilst also being true to yourself.
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterAlright, whatever. Let's say I'm ready to do this.
Ok , so ask God to do all or some of the things I am suggesting under the supposition that he might exist. If he doesn't then you will just be talking to thin air and the worst that will happen is your neighbours might think you a bit strange. If he does then something else might happen .
I fail to see how you can conduct an experiment of this sort ...[text shortened]... on like this and may allow you to conduct the experiment whilst also being true to yourself.
So I sit down, relax, and then say "God, if you are really there then..."
Then what? What should be the content of the rest of my utterings, and then after I am done uttering this prayer, what things should I be looking for? Again, what are some related predictions?
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterI am still operating under the hypothetical posit that God exists, but nothing out of the ordinary has happened. I have had no epiphany, nor have I seen anything external to me that was out of the ordinary. My psychological states are as they were before I engaged in this experiment. I am still happy and calm. I still enjoy my existence without being committed to it. My friends are still wonderful, my cats are still adorable, my work is still nourishing. My prayers for a sign or indication from God are, as of yet, unanswered. My meditation last night was as it was the night before. Should I take this as countervailing evidence to the posit that God exists? I ask this question because it seems to me that what you are putting forth is an empirical hypothesis. You are claiming that God exists and that seeking God will yield evidence for your claim. But empirical hypotheses must have disconfirmation conditions; something must, in principle, have the capacity to count as evidence against them. If an empirical hypothesis cannot be disconfirmed, then it must be compatible with any nomologically possible evidential set. But, if it is thus compatible, then no particular evidential set bears on the likelihood of the hypothesis being true. That is, no evidential set will actually serve to confirm the hypothesis. So, I'm concerned about what precisely would count as evidence against the hypothesis that God exists, at least within the context of this experiment I'm engaged in. Your advice on this matter would be appreciated.
Ok , so ask God to do all or some of the things I am suggesting under the supposition that he might exist. If he doesn't then you will just be talking to thin air and the worst that will happen is your neighbours might think you a bit strange. If he does then something else might happen .
I fail to see how you can conduct an experiment of this sort ...[text shortened]... on like this and may allow you to conduct the experiment whilst also being true to yourself.
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by LemonJello"God if you are really there then.....give me some sense of your presence with me ...or cause my mind to remember a point in my life where I might have felt your presence"
Alright, whatever. Let's say I'm ready to do this.
So I sit down, relax, and then say "God, if you are really there then..."
Then what? What should be the content of the rest of my utterings, and then after I am done uttering this prayer, what things should I be looking for? Again, what are some related predictions?
Remember that whilst there is some obligation on God to answer your prayer (if it is heartfelt and genuine) there is also some obligation on you to be receptive, still and patient. Staring down at your watch and giving up after 2 minutes will produce highly predictable results.
I do feel at this point that it might be neccessary to ask you how genuine your seeking is. If you are harbouring a desire to make fun of the process or are being dissingenuous then once again the results will be predictable. If you are earnestly seeking God you will find him , if you are unconsciously seeking to show him not to exist then that's what you will find , nothing.
09 Jan 08
Originally posted by bbarrIf you want to seek God then ask plain questions . I sense a smirking sarcasm behind the philosobabble. The proposition I have is that it is possible to sense or be in the presence of God's Holy Spirit. Interested?
I am still operating under the hypothetical posit that God exists, but nothing out of the ordinary has happened. I have had no epiphany, nor have I seen anything external to me that was out of the ordinary. My psychological states are as they were before I engaged in this experiment. I am still happy and calm. I still enjoy my existence without being commi ...[text shortened]... e context of this experiment I'm engaged in. Your advice on this matter would be appreciated.
09 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterYikes, chill out. I was asking plain questions, one within the context of the experiment and one to you directly. Within the context of the experiment, I was asking for a sign or indication of God's existence. To you directly I was asking for an explanation of what would count as a sign or indication of God's existence. In the absence of clear conditions for confirmation or disconfirmation of the hypothesis, this doesn't even count as an experiment, for the reasons mentioned above. I really have no patience for your speculations about my motivations. I could speculate that you had an absent father, and that this is what motivates your desire for the existence of a cosmic father-figure. But these speculations don't get us anywhere, do they?
If you want to seek God then ask plain questions . I sense a smirking sarcasm behind the philosobabble. The proposition I have is that it is possible to sense or be in the presence of God's Holy Spirit. Interested?
EDIT: And that you don't understand P does not mean that P is babble. Anybody with even a cursory introduction to the scientific method would understand what I wrote about evidence and confirmation.
