Why I'm a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-08-2015, 09:57 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 01:05 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:47 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You are mistaken. The default position of unintentionality drives science to look for the underlying natural forces at work. Unintentionality assumes that there are natural forces at work to be discovered. If intentionality was as reasonable a default position as unintentionality we'd end up ascribing thunder and lightning to Zeus and "Tide goes in, tide goes out. You can't explain that."

No it's not the driving force of science, nor is it an aspect of the scientific methodology. Science can ignore the question of intention all together. Just like a person can determine how a smartphone works, how it's various physical properties work together, without answering whether it was intentionally created or not.

Nah, that's not science, that would be mechanical engineering- "how shit works" is their business. That misunderstanding is the exact reason why Dr Richard Feynman refused to use the term "computer science" - he insisted it be referred to as "computer engineering".

Science encompasses critical thought, leading to hypothesis and the attempts to disprove that hypothesis.

Science can not be "proven", science can only be disproven.
Once again ... certainty and uncertainty are distinctly different.

If you do science, you look for uncertainty and test it, think about it, test it again, form uncertain ideas about it and test those ideas. Science constantly looks for uncertainties.

It doesn't make sense to look for certainties. That wouldn't be science.

Faith looks for certainty and faithfully, dutifull, comfortingly finds it.

Science and faith are different things requiring different thought processes.
Science - uncertainty
Faith - certainty

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:04 AM (This post was last modified: 09-08-2015 10:11 AM by Free.)
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 09:47 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  John concludes B, Henry concludes A. Which one is right?

Both are correct.

Try to understand, the proposed truth in this context is Intentionality. If both locations have been searched, and no Intentionality or possible intentionality has been discovered, then Intentionality is not the truth.

The truth is therefore, something else. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the truth actually is, for all that matters is that we now know what it is not.

This is knowledge that we have now confirmed.

Do you now understand what we mean?

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:14 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 10:04 AM)Free Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 09:47 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  John concludes B, Henry concludes A. Which one is right?

Both are correct.

Try to understand, the proposed truth in this context is Intentionality. If both locations have been searched, and no Intentionality or possible intentionality has been discovered, then Intentionality is not the truth.

The truth is therefore, something else. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the truth actually is, for all that matters is that we now know what it is not.

This is knowledge that we have now confirmed.

Do you now understand what we mean?

I must be misunderstanding you.

It sounds to me like you're saying that John could conclude intentionality, Henry could conclude unintentionality, and they could both be correct.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:20 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 10:14 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 10:04 AM)Free Wrote:  Both are correct.

Try to understand, the proposed truth in this context is Intentionality. If both locations have been searched, and no Intentionality or possible intentionality has been discovered, then Intentionality is not the truth.

The truth is therefore, something else. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the truth actually is, for all that matters is that we now know what it is not.

This is knowledge that we have now confirmed.

Do you now understand what we mean?

I must be misunderstanding you.

It sounds to me like you're saying that John could conclude intentionality, Henry could conclude unintentionality, and they could both be correct.

No, I have been saying right from the start that it is all about the process of elimination.

Since no evidence or possible evidence of intentionality has been discovered, we can eliminate it.

We can also eliminate any other theories via the same process. We eliminate tens of thousands and still never know what the truth actually is.

But what we do know is that intentionality is not the truth, and we do know that something else is the truth.

We don't need to know what the truth is, but only what it is not ... in the context of this discussion.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:41 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 10:20 AM)Free Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 10:14 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I must be misunderstanding you.

It sounds to me like you're saying that John could conclude intentionality, Henry could conclude unintentionality, and they could both be correct.

No, I have been saying right from the start that it is all about the process of elimination.

Since no evidence or possible evidence of intentionality has been discovered, we can eliminate it.

We can also eliminate any other theories via the same process. We eliminate tens of thousands and still never know what the truth actually is.

But what we do know is that intentionality is not the truth, and we do know that something else is the truth.

We don't need to know what the truth is, but only what it is not ... in the context of this discussion.

And I'm trying to show you why that logic is a complete and utter failure.

Let's look at another hypothetical scenario.

While John was at work, Susan took a book from his table. John comes home to find a missing book. He looks around and finds no evidence that Susan took the book. By your logic, John could then eliminate the possibility that Susan took the book (he looked and didn't find any evidence of it). With your logic, a person can deny reality.

You keep wanting to jump to a conclusion. You seem unsettled with having no conclusion at all, and this is the same trap that leads many to seek religion. If we're honest with ourselves, we'll admit to uncertainty when it's present.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(08-08-2015 12:48 PM)Free Wrote:  We do not, however, make the positive claim that unintentionally is 100% conclusive and factual, but rather only that the evidence indicates it to be more likely than intentionally since we only have two choices, and "intentionally" has been eliminated. Therefore with only 2 choices, then by the process of elimination "unintentionally" becomes the default position.

How do we know that unintentionality is more likely than intentionality. It's seems to me that we would need to know the probability of each to know that one is more probable than the other.

So this should be easy. What is the probability of intentionality? How did you calculate the probability?

Even then, probability doesn't dictate reality. You probably won't win the lottery, and you probably won't get cancer before you're 30, but that doesn't mean those things won't happen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 10:56 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 10:41 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 10:20 AM)Free Wrote:  No, I have been saying right from the start that it is all about the process of elimination.

Since no evidence or possible evidence of intentionality has been discovered, we can eliminate it.

We can also eliminate any other theories via the same process. We eliminate tens of thousands and still never know what the truth actually is.

But what we do know is that intentionality is not the truth, and we do know that something else is the truth.

We don't need to know what the truth is, but only what it is not ... in the context of this discussion.

And I'm trying to show you why that logic is a complete and utter failure.

Let's look at another hypothetical scenario.

While John was at work, Susan took a book from his table. John comes home to find a missing book. He looks around and finds no evidence that Susan took the book. By your logic, John could then eliminate the possibility that Susan took the book (he looked and didn't find any evidence of it). With your logic, a person can deny reality.

This is a Faulty Comparison on many levels.

1. The book existed.
2. It was known to exist.
3. We know Susan took the book.

Now compare to Intentionality:

1. We hypothesis it exists.
2. It is unknown if it exists.
3. We looked for intentionality and find no evidence of existence.

You cannot make a comparison between something that is known to exist, something that is known to be possible, to something that has no evidence or possible evidence.

Complete failure dude.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 11:02 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
There is more evidence that you do not know something, than there is evidence that you do know something. Drinking Beverage

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
09-08-2015, 11:07 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 10:56 AM)Free Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 10:41 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  And I'm trying to show you why that logic is a complete and utter failure.

Let's look at another hypothetical scenario.

While John was at work, Susan took a book from his table. John comes home to find a missing book. He looks around and finds no evidence that Susan took the book. By your logic, John could then eliminate the possibility that Susan took the book (he looked and didn't find any evidence of it). With your logic, a person can deny reality.

This is a Faulty Comparison on many levels.

1. The book existed.
2. It was known to exist.
3. We know Susan took the book.

Now compare to Intentionality:

1. We hypothesis it exists.
2. It is unknown if it exists.
3. We looked for intentionality and find no evidence of existence.

You cannot make a comparison between something that is known to exist, something that is known to be possible, to something that has no evidence or possible evidence.

Complete failure dude.

Fair enough....and things don't exist until after they're discovered...got it...we're good...Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-08-2015, 12:32 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(09-08-2015 11:07 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(09-08-2015 10:56 AM)Free Wrote:  This is a Faulty Comparison on many levels.

1. The book existed.
2. It was known to exist.
3. We know Susan took the book.

Now compare to Intentionality:

1. We hypothesis it exists.
2. It is unknown if it exists.
3. We looked for intentionality and find no evidence of existence.

You cannot make a comparison between something that is known to exist, something that is known to be possible, to something that has no evidence or possible evidence.

Complete failure dude.

Fair enough....and things don't exist until after they're discovered...got it...we're good...Drinking Beverage

I'm glad you are "good" with it all.

By the way ...

Free Wrote:Existence is wholly dependent upon observation, not speculation. You need to understand that we are human, and to us nothing exists until it is discovered as existing by humans.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid828022

Again, glad we are "good."

Drinking Beverage

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: