Why you choose to not believe?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-10-2014, 11:37 AM (This post was last modified: 30-10-2014 11:53 AM by WitchSabrina.)
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(30-10-2014 11:33 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(29-10-2014 04:28 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I can understand the obvious flaws in all the mainstream religious belief systems. What I can't understand is why the choice to believe in a Godless universe without the chance of afterlife? or even an afterlife without a God entity?
------------------------------------
I guess my basic line of reasoning can be summed up as follows..

-We're unable to discern a method to establish the likelihood of one, or the other.
-I see life/living as preferable to death/nonexisting.
-In the absence of the ability to discern possibility/probability you should choose what makes you most happy.

My end game from this would be that its rational to believe, and not rational to not believe.
---------------------------------------

Anyways, I'm interested in hearing your views

I've said it many times and I'll say it again.
A rational mind does not decide what to believe. It is forced to accept that which is supported by evidence.
By the way I don't know if that mine or if I heard it somewhere. Does anyone here know?

It's ok to keep repeating yourself. We don't mind.
Also, however, you made a point of saying you have NO evidence.
So maybe repeat that a few times.

Yanno..... To keep it real and all.
Smile
(And this is for Switz)

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:02 AM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2014 02:18 AM by Switz5678.)
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
I never claimed evidence ( this is a copy/paste from the topic 'Choices'.. Didn't want to derail the thread, and thought it should be here. I hope that's okay?)

"What I thought was that we don't have enough information to even form a probability. When that situation arises why not entertain the scenario you like most. You will be happier. This is more of a philosophy then anything else

We don't have enough information to form a probability of you dying tomorrow. Would you entertain the scenario of your death? of course in this scenario we could find pertinent data which we could use to develop a probability. Things like your age, condition of health, how much you drive each day..

When were speaking of an after-life though we don't even know how to measure the probability. We aren't sure that the test we do are even valid. I don't think the probability is 50/50, I think we have no fucking clue what it is at this time.

People were throwing around likelihood of this and that based on tests that were done of which we aren't even certain they measure what they're intended to measure. The test's that we have done are reasonable try's, but to say after them that you now know some likelihood in my opinion is misguided. The ones who think that we have some 'likelihood' measure are the ones that are deluding themselves

There were a lot of responses to my argument/philosophy in a negative manner. I shoulder part of the blame for not choosing the correct wording, but the snide personal attacks/choosing to attack the weaker version of what I intended (when I think some could realize) was just flabbergasting. When someone can approach me, and show that this "likelihood" was derived through a valid test then I'll thank them, and move on from it. Until they do they can just pound sand for all I care."

So anyone a go for showing me that they have, through tests that they can show are valid(measure what they intend to measure), derived the likelihood? I say we don't have any idea about the probability, but Some say we do, and the burden of proof is on you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:59 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
the same reason I choose not to believe in santa clause, the easter bunny and underpants gnomes

the reason we all believe anything is so that can make decisions that affect us in the real world

if believing in something doesn't affect our choices in anyway compared to not believing in it t hen there is no reason to believe in it

why do you buy weight loss diets ? because you believe they will make you lose wait
if you don't believe it then you won't buy it




there's a bullshit episode on it (diets and food)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR0-zqlbQzw
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 04:44 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:02 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I never claimed evidence ( this is a copy/paste from the topic 'Choices'.. Didn't want to derail the thread, and thought it should be here. I hope that's okay?)

"What I thought was that we don't have enough information to even form a probability. When that situation arises why not entertain the scenario you like most. You will be happier. This is more of a philosophy then anything else

We don't have enough information to form a probability of you dying tomorrow. Would you entertain the scenario of your death? of course in this scenario we could find pertinent data which we could use to develop a probability. Things like your age, condition of health, how much you drive each day..

When were speaking of an after-life though we don't even know how to measure the probability. We aren't sure that the test we do are even valid. I don't think the probability is 50/50, I think we have no fucking clue what it is at this time.

People were throwing around likelihood of this and that based on tests that were done of which we aren't even certain they measure what they're intended to measure. The test's that we have done are reasonable try's, but to say after them that you now know some likelihood in my opinion is misguided. The ones who think that we have some 'likelihood' measure are the ones that are deluding themselves

There were a lot of responses to my argument/philosophy in a negative manner. I shoulder part of the blame for not choosing the correct wording, but the snide personal attacks/choosing to attack the weaker version of what I intended (when I think some could realize) was just flabbergasting. When someone can approach me, and show that this "likelihood" was derived through a valid test then I'll thank them, and move on from it. Until they do they can just pound sand for all I care."

So anyone a go for showing me that they have, through tests that they can show are valid(measure what they intend to measure), derived the likelihood? I say we don't have any idea about the probability, but Some say we do, and the burden of proof is on you.

I'm not an atheist because the probability of a god is very low. I am an atheist because there is absolutely no reason for me to believe in a god, other than a 2000 year old book.

Religion and belief in god can be explained anthropologically and, to some extent, by evolution. Just because some people think they are spiritual, that ghosts exist, that homeopathy works, that spirits fulfil wishes, that the god mentioned in a book exists, doesn't mean that I should too.

I just stopped believing in God because there was no reason to believe.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like undergroundp's post
31-10-2014, 04:57 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(29-10-2014 04:28 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I can understand the obvious flaws in all the mainstream religious belief systems. What I can't understand is why the choice to believe in a Godless universe without the chance of afterlife? or even an afterlife without a God entity?
------------------------------------
I guess my basic line of reasoning can be summed up as follows..

-We're unable to discern a method to establish the likelihood of one, or the other.
-I see life/living as preferable to death/nonexisting.
-In the absence of the ability to discern possibility/probability you should choose what makes you most happy.

My end game from this would be that its rational to believe, and not rational to not believe.
---------------------------------------

Anyways, I'm interested in hearing your views

Believing something does not make it true, and I would much rather know the truth then to believe a false reality just because its comforting.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 05:11 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:02 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I never claimed evidence ( this is a copy/paste from the topic 'Choices'.. Didn't want to derail the thread, and thought it should be here. I hope that's okay?)

"What I thought was that we don't have enough information to even form a probability. When that situation arises why not entertain the scenario you like most. You will be happier. This is more of a philosophy then anything else

We don't have enough information to form a probability of you dying tomorrow. Would you entertain the scenario of your death? of course in this scenario we could find pertinent data which we could use to develop a probability. Things like your age, condition of health, how much you drive each day..

When were speaking of an after-life though we don't even know how to measure the probability. We aren't sure that the test we do are even valid. I don't think the probability is 50/50, I think we have no fucking clue what it is at this time.

People were throwing around likelihood of this and that based on tests that were done of which we aren't even certain they measure what they're intended to measure. The test's that we have done are reasonable try's, but to say after them that you now know some likelihood in my opinion is misguided. The ones who think that we have some 'likelihood' measure are the ones that are deluding themselves

There were a lot of responses to my argument/philosophy in a negative manner. I shoulder part of the blame for not choosing the correct wording, but the snide personal attacks/choosing to attack the weaker version of what I intended (when I think some could realize) was just flabbergasting. When someone can approach me, and show that this "likelihood" was derived through a valid test then I'll thank them, and move on from it. Until they do they can just pound sand for all I care."

So anyone a go for showing me that they have, through tests that they can show are valid(measure what they intend to measure), derived the likelihood? I say we don't have any idea about the probability, but Some say we do, and the burden of proof is on you.

You are doing it again, conflating estimation and calculation. People estimate the likelihood of things all the time.

You are a ranting child sobbing "why? why? why?".

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
31-10-2014, 07:12 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 05:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 02:02 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I never claimed evidence ( this is a copy/paste from the topic 'Choices'.. Didn't want to derail the thread, and thought it should be here. I hope that's okay?)

"What I thought was that we don't have enough information to even form a probability. When that situation arises why not entertain the scenario you like most. You will be happier. This is more of a philosophy then anything else

We don't have enough information to form a probability of you dying tomorrow. Would you entertain the scenario of your death? of course in this scenario we could find pertinent data which we could use to develop a probability. Things like your age, condition of health, how much you drive each day..

When were speaking of an after-life though we don't even know how to measure the probability. We aren't sure that the test we do are even valid. I don't think the probability is 50/50, I think we have no fucking clue what it is at this time.

People were throwing around likelihood of this and that based on tests that were done of which we aren't even certain they measure what they're intended to measure. The test's that we have done are reasonable try's, but to say after them that you now know some likelihood in my opinion is misguided. The ones who think that we have some 'likelihood' measure are the ones that are deluding themselves

There were a lot of responses to my argument/philosophy in a negative manner. I shoulder part of the blame for not choosing the correct wording, but the snide personal attacks/choosing to attack the weaker version of what I intended (when I think some could realize) was just flabbergasting. When someone can approach me, and show that this "likelihood" was derived through a valid test then I'll thank them, and move on from it. Until they do they can just pound sand for all I care."

So anyone a go for showing me that they have, through tests that they can show are valid(measure what they intend to measure), derived the likelihood? I say we don't have any idea about the probability, but Some say we do, and the burden of proof is on you.

You are doing it again, conflating estimation and calculation. People estimate the likelihood of things all the time.

You are a ranting child sobbing "why? why? why?".

Nah; it's the pissy theist's favourite equivocation and burden of proof shifting:
We don't know with absolute certainty...
Therefore we don't know the probabilities with any certainty...
Therefore you can't prove it's not true, SO THERE

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 07:13 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:02 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  When someone can approach me, and show that this "likelihood" was derived through a valid test then I'll thank them, and move on from it. Until they do they can just pound sand for all I care."

Then you don't have an ounce of respect for the scientific method or how we evaluate truth claims. If you want to believe in an afterlife without (and in fact against) evidence that's fine go ahead, hell believe that the sky is made of blueberry jam and marshmallows because we, for the most part, could not give a fuck. HOWEVER if you are going to say that the belief, without evidence, in an afterlife is rational then it is up to you to demonstrate why it is in fact rational and the fact of the mater is that "because you can't prove me wrong" is not an actual argument.
The burden to justify your belief is on you not us to disprove it.


That said, Occam's Razor BY IT"S SELF makes an afterlife less probable then no afterlife because the simplest answer (that death is final)is the most likely. Add to that what we know about the brain and it's effects on identity and consciousness, the demonstrable falsehood of nearly every claim governing an afterlife, then yes it is much much much much less likely an afterlife exists.

Here is a Question for you: What after life do you believe in?

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
31-10-2014, 09:33 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(29-10-2014 07:54 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  
(29-10-2014 07:36 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You'd be happiest by willfully accepting and even inducing delusion for the sake of ... dunno, something?
...

I would be delusional if I had evidence to the contrary. What I'm saying my man is that there is No/None/Zilch/zero means to confront the likelihood of said scenarios. When that situation arises why not choose to entertain the scenario which makes you happiest? I'm not saying that this scenario is the choice all people would make. Perhaps since you have no evidence for the scenario I would choose, you choose the other, and that makes you happy. Then I think that is perfectly reasonable.

I'm not contemplating a 6000 year old world, and entertaining that idea because it makes me happy. I know thats bullshit. I'm saying that when something is 50/50 truly, and at this time you can't possibly know, it is reasonable to entertain what makes you happiest.

Thinking you can survive your own death is a 50/50 proposition is like thinking you can survive being hit by a train is a 50/50 proposition. I don't think you understand probability.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like GirlyMan's post
31-10-2014, 10:14 AM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(29-10-2014 04:28 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I can understand the obvious flaws in all the mainstream religious belief systems. What I can't understand is why the choice to believe in a Godless universe without the chance of afterlife? or even an afterlife without a God entity?
------------------------------------
I guess my basic line of reasoning can be summed up as follows..

-We're unable to discern a method to establish the likelihood of one, or the other.
-I see life/living as preferable to death/nonexisting.
-In the absence of the ability to discern possibility/probability you should choose what makes you most happy.

My end game from this would be that its rational to believe, and not rational to not believe.
---------------------------------------

Anyways, I'm interested in hearing your views

NO NO NO. Because reality doesn't conform itself to my preferences, desires, wishes, dreams, hopes or faith or yours either. In the absence of any valid evidence, the rational thing is not to believe a claim. It really is very simple and I don't understand that you don't understand this. I know I will die some day but what happens after that I have no clue and I'm perfectly fine saying "I don't know".

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: