What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-12-2011, 07:25 PM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 05:42 AM)Malleus Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 08:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 06:08 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Shoot them in the head. You ask for simple, I give you simple. You're just making shit complicated.

What HoC is asking is why you even bother to debate metaphysics with children. ... Ain't much point to it.

Really...? I could have sworn... To me it reads like "shoot them in the head". Is there a dictionary for this?

There is, but it's not publicly available and each edition is highly individual and personalized. You have to find your own edition yourself. Some have reported success with various hallucinogens and psychedelics, but it's all anecdotal.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2011, 08:11 PM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 05:42 AM)Malleus Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 08:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 06:08 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Shoot them in the head. You ask for simple, I give you simple. You're just making shit complicated.

What HoC is asking is why you even bother to debate metaphysics with children. ... Ain't much point to it.

Really...? I could have sworn... To me it reads like "shoot them in the head". Is there a dictionary for this?

Maybe he means "Kill them all - God will know his own", like Arnaud, the Cistercian abbot-commander at Beziers.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
22-12-2011, 08:14 PM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 07:25 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-12-2011 05:42 AM)Malleus Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 08:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-12-2011 06:08 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Shoot them in the head. You ask for simple, I give you simple. You're just making shit complicated.

What HoC is asking is why you even bother to debate metaphysics with children. ... Ain't much point to it.

Really...? I could have sworn... To me it reads like "shoot them in the head". Is there a dictionary for this?

There is, but it's not publicly available and each edition is highly individual and personalized. You have to find your own edition yourself. Some have reported success with various hallucinogens and psychedelics, but it's all anecdotal.

I find hash works better than weed. Or what Johnny C would call the "Black Gungy".

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2011, 10:50 PM (This post was last modified: 22-12-2011 11:23 PM by unsapien.)
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
Okay,

The scientific way of finding truth:

Hypothosis:
The sky is blue.

Test:
I look up and I see the sky is blue.

Confirmation:
I ask the person beside me "is the sky blue?"
they look up and confirm that they see a blue sky.

Testing the theory:
Then we ask a group of people to look up and ask what they see. most say that they see a blue sky, but some say that the sky is white or grey. The majority confirm the theory that the sky is blue.

Refining the theory:
But instead of ignoring the few that said that the sky is not blue, we try to find out why they gave an unexpected answer. some were found to be colour blind, some were found to happen to be looking up when there was a cloud over head.

So we revise our theory:

The sky is blue unless there are clouds overhead.

And we continue testing.



The faith way of finding truth:

The christian says that the sky is red.

He asks the muslim beside him what colour the sky is and he says the sky is purple.

They go out and ask others what the colour of the sky is and each time they get a different answer.

Meanwhile nobody looks up to see what the colour of the sky is because they are all afraid that it may not be the colour they believe it is, and instead of looking up to test the matter, they all agree that each point of view is valid, but that their point of view is "more" valid because some ancient guy also agreed with them (even though he never looked up either)

"I am a knowledgeable man, I have knowledge. If I knew how I knew what I know, I would know half as much, because it would be clogged up with where I knew it from...that is why I cannot always cite my sources. - David Mitchell
"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unsapien's post
22-12-2011, 11:57 PM (This post was last modified: 22-12-2011 11:59 PM by morondog.)
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 10:50 PM)unsapien Wrote:  Testing the theory:
Then we ask a group of people to look up and ask what they see. most say that they see a blue sky, but some say that the sky is white or grey. The majority confirm the theory that the sky is blue.

Refining the theory:
But instead of ignoring the few that said that the sky is not blue, we try to find out why they gave an unexpected answer. some were found to be colour blind, some were found to happen to be looking up when there was a cloud over head.

There is a slight problem here in that if you have faith sky colour people in your test subjects then they'll answer red or purple, so you have to exclude them from the sample. But then you'll have to explain to them why excluding them from the sample (because they refuse to look up) is reasonable... and they'll continue to insist that your research is biased Sad
This is a beautiful analogy by the way Smile It's simple and captures perfectly the two different approaches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2011, 12:54 AM (This post was last modified: 23-12-2011 01:10 AM by unsapien.)
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 11:57 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(22-12-2011 10:50 PM)unsapien Wrote:  Testing the theory:
Then we ask a group of people to look up and ask what they see. most say that they see a blue sky, but some say that the sky is white or grey. The majority confirm the theory that the sky is blue.

Refining the theory:
But instead of ignoring the few that said that the sky is not blue, we try to find out why they gave an unexpected answer. some were found to be colour blind, some were found to happen to be looking up when there was a cloud over head.

There is a slight problem here in that if you have faith sky colour people in your test subjects then they'll answer red or purple, so you have to exclude them from the sample. But then you'll have to explain to them why excluding them from the sample (because they refuse to look up) is reasonable... and they'll continue to insist that your research is biased Sad

Then I will step out of their way as they see a (theoretically scientifically confirmed green traffic light) but then they still want to walk into oncoming traffic (because the traffic light was "only theoretically" green)

"I am a knowledgeable man, I have knowledge. If I knew how I knew what I know, I would know half as much, because it would be clogged up with where I knew it from...that is why I cannot always cite my sources. - David Mitchell
"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2011, 01:16 AM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(22-12-2011 10:50 PM)unsapien Wrote:  Testing the theory:
Then we ask a group of people to look up and ask what they see. most say that they see a blue sky, but some say that the sky is white or grey. The majority confirm the theory that the sky is blue.

...The christian says that the sky is red.

A mass poll is really not scientific. You have to define "blue", and then come up with an objective way of comparing the sky to that definition.

But the worst part is that the christian isn't making a bold-faced false claim ("I see a red sky"), but rather a claim that there's something there that we don't see ("The sky is blue but feels red"), and that's harder to disprove. In fact, it's impossible to disprove... all you can prove is a total lack of evidence, and try to convince people to stop believing in hypotheses that lack evidence.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2011, 01:32 AM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
Sup, MDog?

Quote:So if the assertion was that it was an invisible teapot then all would be well and it would be a good analogy?

Invisible how? Human technology? Have we actually figured that out? Can you show me the data? The patent? The actual technological application at work? I think we have figured out invisibility on a micro level but I don't think it's been scaled up to be useful enough to cloak an entire teapot. Does that rule out invisibility? Perhaps some secret technology no one's heard of? Well colour me sceptical.

As long as we're talking in terms of something that a human being did, we can investigate it. Human activity is always natural, never supernatural.

A wizard put it there and made it invisible! OK. Now there's no conversation. There cannot be empirical evidence about the process through which a warlock puts an undetectable teapot in orbit of another planet. At that point, I either believe you or I don’t.

So no, invisibility doesn't help things.

Quote:...but it's more a parable to show the absurdity...

That's actually the level I think it fails on. It conflates difficult with impossible. It's difficult to prove that there's a teapot in orbit of Venus. But it's possible. It's absolutely impossible to prove/disprove God. Difficult and impossible are two different arguments. That's why I think it fails.

Quote:Um... could you, though, point out to me a situation when it is reasonable for a theist to ask me for proof in a debate? And proof of what? 'Cos I mean... proofs per se are hard... that's why we mostly deal in probabilities... For the purposes of answering the question you may assume that I am the most troglodyte atheist who ever lived, steeped in ad hominems and fallacious argument.

It's reasonable when you make an assertion.

-Your father is not your biological father.
-There will be no tomorrow.
-There are no other planets.

If you told me any of those things, I'd demand proof. Otherwise I'm just credulous. If I was a Theist and you told me there is no God, I'd be like, "Explain to me why I should believe you. Don't tell me why you believe it, because you can believe whatever the hell you want. Tell me why I should believe it."

I think that the layman's version of proof is simply empirical evidence. If one makes an assertion and one wants someone else to believe it, then one should have some evidence to back up their assertion. Otherwise, they're asking the other person to simply take a leap of faith and believe them. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, just pointing out what's what.

The reverse, naturally, is equally true. If a Theist knocks on your door wearing a smart white shirt with a pocket protector and asks you to believe in God, you have the right to ask for a little proof before you buy what they're selling.

Hey, Unsapien.

Your analogy is very good in the science section but the Theist section is highly biased. You use sky colours that most of us at first blush would simply assume are impossible, implying (and leading us to believe) that the Theists are necessarily wrong and incapable of simple observation. A more accurate analogy is that everyone says the sky is blue, but what differ are the explanations of why it is blue. The sky is blue because of (insert physical phenomenon here) vs God made the sky blue vs God made the sky blue because (insert Holy Book reference here).

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2011, 01:56 AM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
Serious issue with the sky discussion. Are we describing the water particles in the air or the hydrogen? It's not all blue even when it looks blue. Also it's perfectly easy to see a sky of any color depending on timing. And a better way of attacking a faith would be that the muslim looks to the sky at the same time each day and it is red but fails to look during the rest of the day. This then creates more of the real analogy. The religious person is correct about an observation but not always observing every detail.

This is more the experience that is found.

As far as invisibility gear they've come up with a special lens and cloth combination that does a cool invisibility trick.

To the atheist there is more to life than humans, but to the believer there is more to humans than life. It's not the we aren't observing the same thing, but it is that we aren't looking for the same thing.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2011, 01:58 AM
RE: What is the simplest analogy to show "faith" of existence is illogical?
(23-12-2011 01:32 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Sup, MDog?

Quote:So if the assertion was that it was an invisible teapot then all would be well and it would be a good analogy?

Invisible how? Human technology? Have we actually figured that out? Can you show me the data? The patent? The actual technological application at work? I think we have figured out invisibility on a micro level but I don't think it's been scaled up to be useful enough to cloak an entire teapot. Does that rule out invisibility? Perhaps some secret technology no one's heard of? Well colour me sceptical.

As long as we're talking in terms of something that a human being did, we can investigate it. Human activity is always natural, never supernatural.

A wizard put it there and made it invisible! OK. Now there's no conversation. There cannot be empirical evidence about the process through which a warlock puts an undetectable teapot in orbit of another planet. At that point, I either believe you or I don’t.

So no, invisibility doesn't help things.

Quote:...but it's more a parable to show the absurdity...

That's actually the level I think it fails on. It conflates difficult with impossible. It's difficult to prove that there's a teapot in orbit of Venus. But it's possible. It's absolutely impossible to prove/disprove God. Difficult and impossible are two different arguments. That's why I think it fails.

Hi Ghost Smile

Er... a patent for an invisible teapot? I'm not sure the patent office would be willing to grant that... 'Specially if it makes invisible tea...

I get what you're saying. But the teapot is a god-of-the-gaps analogy as I see it. If you read the original specifications, the teapot is too small to observe through an Earth telescope. And Russell didn't say anything about human agency in putting it there. Merely that to believe in such a teapot would be agreed by most people to be unreasonable. Maybe we should stick one up there just for shits and giggles.

It's part of the reason people have retreated to a more philosophical stance on God proof - the only reason people assert that you can't scientifically prove or disprove God (I think) is because all experiments to that end have failed to find a trace of God.

Quote:Don't tell me why you believe it, because you can believe whatever the hell you want. Tell me why I should believe it."

I think we're on the same page Smile Well said!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: