Is belief in the unseen irrational?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-03-2016, 01:26 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(19-03-2016 09:02 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is belief in the unseen irrational?

"The Unseen" is an overly broad category.

Leprechauns and unicorns are unseen. So are magnitism and gravity.

Some of these things are irrational to believe in. Others are not.

Asking about everything unseen, all at once, packaged together like that, is the wrong way to go about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reltzik's post
20-03-2016, 01:52 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
Quote:2. You do not always need emperical evidence to rationally believe some things exist.....

3. Directly perceiving something (gravity) without any emperical evidence for its existence is sufficient to believe in it.
4. Directly perceiving something (supernatural presence) without any emperical evidence for its existence is not sufficient to believe in it

5. Credibility of the person making the claim makes it rational (pyramids)
6. Credibility of the person making the claim about God's existence is irelevant.

If you try to insult the intellect of the people around here, please try harder next time, but............we know you wont. Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
20-03-2016, 05:27 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 12:18 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  He's just a common garden variety attention troll.

Fixed.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
20-03-2016, 06:13 AM (This post was last modified: 20-03-2016 06:32 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 01:03 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-03-2016 09:02 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is belief in the unseen irrational?

This depends entirely on what you mean by "unseen". Completely unevidenced? Yes, belief in completely unevidenced things is irrational. In evidence, but not personally witnessed? No, belief in such things is not irrational.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. A lack of emperical evidence makes belief in God's existence irrational

Pedantry: a lack of logical necessity, combined with the null hypothesis being that it does not exist and a lack of evidence to overturn said null hypothesis, make belief in the existence of gods irrational.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  2. You do not always need emperical evidence to rationally believe some things exist like the pyramids.

Yes, you do. We have empirical evidence that the pyramids exist.

What you mean is that you do not have to personally witness the pyramids to rationally believe that they exist.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  3. Directly perceiving something (gravity) without any emperical evidence for its existence is sufficient to believe in it.

Directly perceiving gravity is empirical evidence for its existence.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  4. Directly perceiving something (supernatural presence) without any emperical evidence for its existence is not sufficient to believe in it

No one has ever directly perceived a supernatural presence.

They have perceived a great number of things that they believe are supernatural presences, but this is not the same thing.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  5. Credibility of the person making the claim makes it rational (pyramids)

Availability of the evidence makes a claim rational. That the person making the claim is credible is a consequence of this, not the cause.

(19-03-2016 11:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  6. Credibility of the person making the claim about God's existence is irelevant.

No one has any relevant credentials when it comes to establishing the existence of a god.
If you put too many arguments forth I may overlook them in my replies and you may begin to think I am being evasive. Can we take them one at a time instead of this shotgun approach?

You said "completely does not exist". At what point in your logic did you arrive at the belief that something "completely" does not exist? Do you possess omniscience or is it based on the idea that if no one has proven it to you yet it means no one has ever proven it? What happens if someone proves it and does not tell you? Isn't your statement an assumption?

How are you able to arrive at these conclusions without the use of assumptions?
Are you making logical arguments based on presuppositions?

You said:
No one has any relevant credentials when it comes to establishing the existence of a god.
Is this another assumption? Are you claiming omniscience? Is claiming omniscience a method of proving the existence of something?

You said:
They have perceived a great number of things that they believe are supernatural presences, but this is not the same thing.

From google:
grav·i·ty/ˈɡravədē/
noun
the force that attracts a body toward the center of the earth, or toward any other physical body having mass. For most purposes Newton's laws of gravity apply, with minor modifications to take the general theory of relativity into account.
extreme or alarming importance; seriousness.

What specific empirical evidence have you found to prove the existence of gravity?
Is this same method of proving Gravity exists not applicable to God's existence?
Why do you assume my questions are assertions?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2016, 07:01 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(19-03-2016 11:09 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(19-03-2016 11:06 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Why would you think that?

I make no assertions. I am only asking questions.

By your own admission, your topic is intentially vague, is this so you can draw out answers that will never satisfy you, so you can then move the goal posts?
I do not wish to be satisfied. I only wish to read the answers to my questions and questions to my answers. Have I established any goal posts as yet? Is the establishment of a goal post not an assertion?

Do you think that's how forums function or should function?

What is unseen? Is there a contrast to it that is seen? Is there a limit to what counts as seen mentally or sensory?

Also, do you actually think if something is a question it lacks assertions outright? There are such things as loaded questions. Do you think they lack qualities to or problematic outcomes or do you not know about that concept?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
20-03-2016, 07:11 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 07:01 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(19-03-2016 11:09 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I do not wish to be satisfied. I only wish to read the answers to my questions and questions to my answers. Have I established any goal posts as yet? Is the establishment of a goal post not an assertion?

Do you think that's how forums function or should function?

What is unseen? Is there a contrast to it that is seen? Is there a limit to what counts as seen mentally or sensory?

Also, do you actually think if something is a question it lacks assertions outright? There are such things as loaded questions. Do you think they lack qualities to or problematic outcomes or do you not know about that concept?
Yes I am aware of the loaded questions.
I believe vague questions are the furthest on the spectrum of questions from loaded questions. It's one of the reasons I prefer vague questions, because, the persons answering get to establish the goal posts themselves.
I could be wrong. What do you think is the best way to avoid asking a loaded question?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2016, 07:17 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 07:11 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(20-03-2016 07:01 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Do you think that's how forums function or should function?

What is unseen? Is there a contrast to it that is seen? Is there a limit to what counts as seen mentally or sensory?

Also, do you actually think if something is a question it lacks assertions outright? There are such things as loaded questions. Do you think they lack qualities to or problematic outcomes or do you not know about that concept?
Yes I am aware of the loaded questions.
I believe vague questions are the furthest on the spectrum of questions from loaded questions. It's one of the reasons I prefer vague questions, because, the persons answering get to establish the goal posts themselves.
I could be wrong. What do you think is the best way to avoid asking a loaded question?
By examining if there are assumptions within the questions and attempting to make there as few if possible.

I don't think the question of this thread is that way, but I think several questions you asked last night were.

Plus just the notion that I'm only asking questions as a statement doesn't really establish or define anything as a response.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2016, 07:24 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
you seem to be hung up on not being able to prove the pyramids exist unless you go there personally. . there is this thing called google earth that you can use to see them. there are also photographs of the pyramids. id count both things as decent evidence. unless there is some massive and elaborate conspiracy going on. try to find a photograph of god or locate him on google earth, then ill consider it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dark Wanderer's post
20-03-2016, 07:32 AM (This post was last modified: 20-03-2016 07:46 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 07:24 AM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  you seem to be hung up on not being able to prove the pyramids exist unless you go there personally. . there is this thing called google earth that you can use to see them. there are also photographs of the pyramids. id count both things as decent evidence. unless there is some massive and elaborate conspiracy going on. try to find a photograph of god or locate him on google earth, then ill consider it.
You may not be aware of my beliefs my friend so I will tell you now.
Please look at my signature. Even if I saw the pyramids personally I still would not be convinced that it existed outside of our perception of it.
Proof is an illusion & yet I maintain the fact that I may be wrong.

I only seek the logic behind everyone's statements. If I find flaw I point it out. I could be wrong and I am open to correction.

Would you like to know why I seek the logic behind everyone's statements?

Concerning your statement about the way you proved the pyramids exist:
Your approach is admittedly subject to deceit although highly unlikely. Anyone that requires proof of the existence of the Pyramid has to contend with the possibility that it may be a deceit. Simply ignoring the possibility does not mean the possibility of it being a conspiracy does not exist. Science & logic do not eternally exclude possibilities when drawing conclusions, so why should a rational thinking person be different?

People that believe in God may be subject to deceit in the same way belief in the Pyramids are subject to deceit. I could be wrong.
I wish to compare the logic of how Atheists prove the Pyramids exist and how Theists prove God exists by the same assumptions and see which one is more believable.

There are many books/articles/websites/people which state that the Pyramids exists. Did you conclude it's existence based on that?
There are many books/articles/websites/people which state that the God exists. Did they conclude it's existence based on that?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2016, 07:34 AM
RE: Is belief in the unseen irrational?
(20-03-2016 07:32 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(20-03-2016 07:24 AM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  you seem to be hung up on not being able to prove the pyramids exist unless you go there personally. . there is this thing called google earth that you can use to see them. there are also photographs of the pyramids. id count both things as decent evidence. unless there is some massive and elaborate conspiracy going on. try to find a photograph of god or locate him on google earth, then ill consider it.
You may not be aware of my beliefs my friend so I will tell you now.
Please look at my signature. Even if I saw the pyramids personally I still would not be convinced that it existed outside of our perception of it.
Proof is an illusion & yet I maintain the fact that I may be wrong.

I only seek the logic behind everyone's statements. If I find flaw I point it out. I could be wrong and I am open to correction.

Would you like to know why I seek the logic behind everyone's statement?
What is seeing personally?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: