Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-08-2014, 04:32 AM
Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
I am curious wether there are any theists in here whose position on the existence of God is not a matter of faith, e.g. is facts-based.

Notes:

* I am uninterested in hearing from people who reference the bible or other religious writings as a source of truth. Please refrain from posting if this is the source of your ideas.
* I am uninterested in hearing from people who operate from theories of "intelligent design". Godel's incompleteness theorem proves mathematically to my satisfaction that all "intelligent design" arguments are inherently meaningless, and I'm not interested in debating that on this thread.

So - just theists who have a position which is facts-based, e.g based on direct personal experience. Do we have any in the room? :-)

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 07:48 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Yes. We have at least one in the room.

But, personal experiences aren't "fact based"; therefore, nulling and voiding this conversation... unless... of course, you're actually willing to concede the point that personal experiences =/= fact.

But, if you do that, your position falls flat, and you can't argue against it.

Come full circle.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
17-08-2014, 07:58 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
I just posted on the Strong Atheist version of this thread. personal experiences are not fact based, but I did have the personal experience as a believer of being filled with the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. This was certainly a personal sign of the supernatural in my life, but I later learned it's based on flimsy evidence and deceptive psychology used to fool people.

The tree of delusion is nourished by the vague promises and skewed perception of prayer. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
17-08-2014, 10:43 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Thanks for the replies guys!

If i define "personal experience" as "an occurrence i have direct awareness of", then I would make the claim that all personal experiences are facts-based.

Personal experience, e.g. simple awareness, sits at the very heart of an experience or knowledge of fact.

Any inferences made from that occurrence or experience do however not necessarily point to fact. I may have an experience and through faulty reasoning conclude that the experience was of god talking to me in person. However, that's a separate issue, interpretation of the facts is a separate issue to simple factual reporting.

To give a concrete example of the factual nature of personal experience - next time your girlfriend dumps you and you feel emotional pain:

1/ Notice you can't prove to anyone that the pain is really occurring (it's a personal experience)
2/ Yet the pain is real, your consciousness knows that pain inside you as a fact of the cosmos

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 11:14 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 10:43 AM)phil.a Wrote:  Thanks for the replies guys!

If i define "personal experience" as "an occurrence i have direct awareness of", then I would make the claim that all personal experiences are facts-based.

Personal experience, e.g. simple awareness, sits at the very heart of an experience or knowledge of fact.

Any inferences made from that occurrence or experience do however not necessarily point to fact. I may have an experience and through faulty reasoning conclude that the experience was of god talking to me in person. However, that's a separate issue, interpretation of the facts is a separate issue to simple factual reporting.

To give a concrete example of the factual nature of personal experience - next time your girlfriend dumps you and you feel emotional pain:

1/ Notice you can't prove to anyone that the pain is really occurring (it's a personal experience)
2/ Yet the pain is real, your consciousness knows that pain inside you as a fact of the cosmos

Phil

Not really, consider phantom pain - is it real?

Or consider hallucination. Is it real? Real in what sense?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 11:17 AM (This post was last modified: 17-08-2014 11:25 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
There is no such thing as "simple factual reporting". All reporting is "interpreted reporting". The experience is *processed* by a human brain. Every brain that exists processes slightly differently. All reported memories are ("re-manufactured" + "re-interpreted") events. With enough reports, one may or may not have a Bell distribution of reports that may or may not describe the event.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Sent by Jebus to put the stud back in Bible Study. "I believe Mr. Peanut is the Messiah" -- onlinebiker
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
17-08-2014, 11:26 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 11:17 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no such thing as "simple factual reporting". All reporting is "interpreted reporting". The experience is *processed* by a human brain. Every brain that exists processes slightly differently. All reported memories are ("re-manufactured" + "re-interpreted") events.

Doubly processed, really.

We filter and interpret input to create experience, and then filter and interpret experience to report it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:46 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 11:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  Not really, consider phantom pain - is it real?

Or consider hallucination. Is it real? Real in what sense?

It's real in that it's an actual experience. Interpretations might not be real, e.g. phantom pain the mind interprets as coming from an amputated limb, the pain is real (probably as a result of stimulation of the nerve ending in our stump) even though the mind's spatial location of the pain isn't real.

Similar thing with hallucination. I think there must be some underlying cause and effect, e.g. there's some factual underpinning to the experience, even if the mind's interpretation of the situation is false.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 04:00 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 11:17 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no such thing as "simple factual reporting". All reporting is "interpreted reporting".

OK I accept this, clearly any attempt to talk about an experience involves interpretation.

It would have been better if I'd have perhaps talked of "direct experience" rather than "simple factual reporting".

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 04:09 AM
RE: Theists: do any of you have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 07:58 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I just posted on the Strong Atheist version of this thread. personal experiences are not fact based, but I did have the personal experience as a believer of being filled with the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. This was certainly a personal sign of the supernatural in my life, but I later learned it's based on flimsy evidence and deceptive psychology used to fool people.

Well you had an actual experience, and insofar as you had that experience, the experience itself was real.

What was seemingly not real was your mind's interpretations of that experience, e.g. the stories you chose to tell about that experience. Perhaps as fact you felt bliss or something like that and erroneously interpreted that as "being filled with the holy spirit".

That you falsely interpreted the facts does not make the facts themselves vanish. If you felt bliss, then it's fact that you felt bliss!

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: