Why I'm a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-08-2015, 05:01 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 04:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  However, the lack of evidence that should be there is evidence of absence.

Now all you need to do is make the text as humongous as possible, bold it, underline it, colorize it, and then get a hammer and some nails and nail it to the god damn forum and surround it with neon lights.

Maybe then the point will be driven home.

Thumbsup

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
08-08-2015, 05:02 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 07:30 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 07:22 AM)Chas Wrote:  I have been honest and clear.
  • There is no evidence of intentionality in the workings of the universe.
  • Therefore, the logical working hypothesis for investigating reality is that there isn't any intenionality.

Yes, that much is clear, but we're talking about unintentionally for the moment.

Would you agree with this:

[*]There is no evidence of unintentionality in the workings of the universe.
[*]Therefore, the logical working hypothesis for investigating reality is that there isn't any unintentionally.

Unintentional is the lack of intention. There is no property of "unintentionality". Facepalm

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
08-08-2015, 08:18 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 07:30 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yes, that much is clear, but we're talking about unintentionally for the moment.

Would you agree with this:

[*]There is no evidence of unintentionality in the workings of the universe.
[*]Therefore, the logical working hypothesis for investigating reality is that there isn't any unintentionally.

Unintentional is the lack of intention. There is no property of "unintentionality". Facepalm

Your logic is flawed. You say that say that lack of evidence of existence = evidence of non-existence. Isn't the fact that we discover 15,000 species every year proof that lack of evidence of existence =/= evidence of non-existence? Before we discover anything, there is lack of evidence for its existence.

Because of this, we have different approaches on the matter. I would say that based on everything I've seen, I have no reason to believe that there is any intentionality in the workings of the universe. I don't think we can rule out the possibility of intention, because for all I know, it might be possible that there is intention, and that the universe exists exactly as it is intended. Again, I have absolutely no reason to believe in an intentional universe, but thus far, we don't have enough information to know whether or not something like that is possible. Perhaps if we discover the origin of the universe, we'll have a clearer understanding. Besides epistemological reasons, I don't like to rule things out because I believe it can make us close-minded, and I think an open-minded approach is best when looking for truth/knowledge, and doing science. The reason I don't feel the need to prove an unintentional universe, is because thus far, I have no real evidence one way or the other, and because there is no evidence, it's not even really a thing to be considered. My reaction is to just "move on," there's really nothing to talk about with intentionality because, there's no evidence for it. We just dismiss it like we do all things that have no evidence of existence.

Keep in mind that 15,000 species are discovered each year. Someone could make up a fictional species, and then we could later find out it indeed does exist. Lack of evidence for existence doesn't conclude nonexistence, and lack of evidence of intention doesn't conclude no intention.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2015, 08:42 PM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2015 08:45 PM by Chas.)
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 08:18 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Unintentional is the lack of intention. There is no property of "unintentionality". Facepalm

Your logic is flawed. You say that say that lack of evidence of existence = evidence of non-existence. Isn't the fact that we discover 15,000 species every year proof that lack of evidence of existence =/= evidence of non-existence? Before we discover anything, there is lack of evidence for its existence.

No, I said the absence of evidence that should be present is evidence of absence.

Quote:
Because of this, we have different approaches on the matter. I would say that based on everything I've seen, I have no reason to believe that there is any intentionality in the workings of the universe. I don't think we can rule out the possibility of intention, because for all I know, it might be possible that there is intention, and that the universe exists exactly as it is intended. Again, I have absolutely no reason to believe in an intentional universe, but thus far, we don't have enough information to know whether or not something like that is possible. Perhaps if we discover the origin of the universe, we'll have a clearer understanding. Besides epistemological reasons, I don't like to rule things out because I believe it can make us close-minded, and I think an open-minded approach is best when looking for truth/knowledge, and doing science. The reason I don't feel the need to prove an unintentional universe, is because thus far, I have no real evidence one way or the other, and because there is no evidence, it's not even really a thing to be considered. My reaction is to just "move on," there's really nothing to talk about with intentionality because, there's no evidence for it. We just dismiss it like we do all things that have no evidence of existence.

And I have said nothing that conflicts with that. I suggest you read what I said and stop reading Tomasia's interpretations of what I say.

I said that the rational working hypothesis is that there is no intentionality.

Quote:Keep in mind that 15,000 species are discovered each year. Someone could make up a fictional species, and then we could later find out it indeed does exist.

One can hypothesize the existence of an unknown species. If there is no evidence of it, then it is not reasonable to believe it exists.

Biologists have, in fact, hypothesized the existence of never before seen species and have been proven correct. For instance, "Back in early 1862, a British orchid grower sent Charles Darwin a series of orchids from Madagascar, which included the beautiful and star-shaped flower of Angraecum sesquipedale. This has an exceptionally long nectary (getting on for 30 cm) and in a book on orchid pollination, Darwin suggested that this extreme feature may have evolved alongside a moth with an exceptionally long tongue to pollinate it."

Darwin had indirect evidence and a theory that made it a reasonable hypothesis.

Quote:
Lack of evidence for existence doesn't conclude nonexistence, and lack of evidence of intention doesn't conclude no intention.

When there is any reason to suppose that there is intention, I will include it in my working hypothesis. Until then, intention and pixies stay out.

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
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
08-08-2015, 08:57 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 03:11 PM)Free Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 03:08 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The ability (at any given moment) to perceive something in no way affects its actual existence. Saying "it does not exist to me" is equivocating the word ''exists".

That is true outside the human experience, as far as we can ascertain.

But if no humans existed, there would be none to claim the existence of anything, and therefore nothing exists to us. It's irrelevant if it exists outside the human experience.

It is not. For billions of years what existed outside the human experience was on a trajectory that ultimately resulted in our evolution as a sentient species. It was not irrelevant, and actually of ultimate importance to us, and none of it was "experienced" by us.

Everything that happened in pre-history was not experienced by humans. By your logic, dinosaurs didn't exist.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
08-08-2015, 09:13 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 08:18 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Unintentional is the lack of intention. There is no property of "unintentionality". Facepalm

Your logic is flawed. You say that say that lack of evidence of existence = evidence of non-existence. Isn't the fact that we discover 15,000 species every year proof that lack of evidence of existence =/= evidence of non-existence? Before we discover anything, there is lack of evidence for its existence.

You still do not seem to understand the concept regarding the difference between Absence of Evidence and Evidence of Absence, despite the fact that my previous analogy regarding the search for the truth should have made it crystal clear.

Let us look again.

Objective: We are looking for the truth.
Location: The truth is storied in only 1 of 2 possible locations; Location A, or Location B.
Process 1: We do an exhaustive search of Location A, and find no evidence of the truth, nor any evidence of any possible truth.

Now, because Location A was fully examined, and no evidence was found whatsoever, then it is very reasonable to accept as evidence the absence of evidence that the truth, or possibility of the truth, does not exist in Location A.

In short, it is submitted as evidence that the absence of any evidence of the truth in Location A demonstrates that the truth does not exist in Location A.

Since the only other option is Location B, and Location A has been eliminated, it is reasonable and intellectually honest to submit that Location B must be the location of the truth.

It does not matter if we never find the truth in Location B, for all that matters is that we can reasonably conclude that Location B is where we will find it, since it does not exist in the only other available place, Location A.

When there are only 2 options and 1 has been eliminated, then the other must quite logically be where the truth exists.


Quote:Keep in mind that 15,000 species are discovered each year. Someone could make up a fictional species, and then we could later find out it indeed does exist. Lack of evidence for existence doesn't conclude nonexistence, and lack of evidence of intention doesn't conclude no intention.

You keep bringing up this 15,000 species thing, but let me show you exactly why it is a false analogy.

When we find one species, we gain confidence that we will find another. Then, as more species are found, we have increased confidence and likelihood that more again will be discovered.

Please demonstrate to me where we have ever found one single god existing so that we can then qualify "intentionality" as having any possible validity.

And that is where your analogy fails.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2015, 09:16 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 08:57 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 03:11 PM)Free Wrote:  That is true outside the human experience, as far as we can ascertain.

But if no humans existed, there would be none to claim the existence of anything, and therefore nothing exists to us. It's irrelevant if it exists outside the human experience.

It is not. For billions of years what existed outside the human experience was on a trajectory that ultimately resulted in our evolution as a sentient species. It was not irrelevant, and actually of ultimate importance to us, and none of it was "experienced" by us.

Everything that happened in pre-history was not experienced by humans. By your logic, dinosaurs didn't exist.

My logic is correct. You have never experienced a dinosaur, because they no longer exist.

Simple.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2015, 09:41 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
*Raises hand*

Um, I've kind of gotten lost in the following of this thread over the days/// weeks?

Has the OP posted anything that seems to be evidence of a deity? If so, a linky please?

Also, is said poster still posting any where on the boards? Or have they faded away? Sadcryface
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2015, 09:49 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 09:16 PM)Free Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 08:57 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It is not. For billions of years what existed outside the human experience was on a trajectory that ultimately resulted in our evolution as a sentient species. It was not irrelevant, and actually of ultimate importance to us, and none of it was "experienced" by us.

Everything that happened in pre-history was not experienced by humans. By your logic, dinosaurs didn't exist.

My logic is correct. You have never experienced a dinosaur, because they no longer exist.

Simple.

Big Grin

But I have. Their remains exist, and what does remain of them has been of huge important to science in the past few hundred years.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
08-08-2015, 09:52 PM
Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 02:36 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 02:28 PM)Free Wrote:  And still you have not demonstrated where you placed in quotes as if quoting me where I said "seems less likely."

I said no such thing.

Wow, this is exhausting. Ok, why was one option eliminated? Drinking Beverage

Lol. I think I've raised that question several times already.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: