Why you choose to not believe?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-10-2014, 02:10 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 01:53 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  Dude.....

Lol

Are you the residential cheerleader? You have brought nothing to the table.

I'm fairly certain that if I would have left afterlife out of this from the beginning, and stated this philosophy shit wouldn't have rolled down hill like it did.

A much better response would have came if I stated:

A.I have a disease of which nothing is known about at this time..(no outlook/prognosis, no mortality rate)
B.Entertaining that I beat this disease makes me happier
C.I entertain beating the disease

I think some understood what I was saying, and a lot didn't. I think that the ones who were sincerely trying to confront my argument in its strongest form, and could not decipher it are not to be blamed. This is a failure by me in this case. For those who created strawmen etc.. They provided nothing, and they failed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:15 PM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2014 02:30 PM by Switz5678.)
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:03 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That's still incoherent.

What is necessary for a belief to make you happy? It must necessarily be a belief that affects you in some way if it is true. Otherwise, who gives a shit?

You've now limited your consideration to things that are sufficiently defined that one can assess some "happiness" value, and yet simultaneously so completely undefined that no knowledge about them does - or even can - exist. It would seem to me that the intersection between those sets is null.

Not to mention the continued presupposition that it's possible to exercise choice in belief...

I stated nothing about a belief, again a straw-man. This is entertaining a scenario.. Could call it hope. Does it mean anything in the grand scheme of things? No, but if it makes you happier to have this hope why not? This obviously applies to situations where nothing can really be said as of yet. I can obviously sense that you are an intelligent person, and I feel like we were getting into a brain measuring contest by arguing semantics. Can you really not see my concept?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:22 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:15 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 02:03 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That's still incoherent.

What is necessary for a belief to make you happy? It must necessarily be a belief that affects you in some way if it is true. Otherwise, who gives a shit?

You've now limited your consideration to things that are sufficiently defined that one can assess some "happiness" value, and yet simultaneously so completely undefined that no knowledge about them does - or even can - exist. It would seem to me that the intersection between those sets is null.

Not to mention the continued presupposition that it's possible to exercise choice in belief...

I stated nothing about a belief, again a straw-man.

Your thread title says you did. The entire thread is about whether or not we can choose to believe or not to believe. How can you claim otherwise with a straight face?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Grasshopper's post
31-10-2014, 02:23 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:15 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 02:03 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That's still incoherent.

What is necessary for a belief to make you happy? It must necessarily be a belief that affects you in some way if it is true. Otherwise, who gives a shit?

You've now limited your consideration to things that are sufficiently defined that one can assess some "happiness" value, and yet simultaneously so completely undefined that no knowledge about them does - or even can - exist. It would seem to me that the intersection between those sets is null.

Not to mention the continued presupposition that it's possible to exercise choice in belief...

I stated nothing about a belief, again a straw-man.

Uh, no.

There is no other way to interpret your statements.

Are you going to attempt tell me that after explicitly referring to beliefs in your OP there is some sort of substantive difference between belief and your latter-day revision of "entertaining" some "X"?

Because you'd have to say what "X" was, and since we're clearly not dealing with a fact, we're left with, yes, beliefs, opinions, notions, positions... take your pick, but it does not change my response.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:24 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:22 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 02:15 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I stated nothing about a belief, again a straw-man.

Your thread title says you did. The entire thread is about whether or not we can choose to believe or not to believe. How can you claim otherwise with a straight face?

No, no, no, Grasshopper, he totally changed his tune; how could you have missed it?

Why, he clearly said entertain X instead of believe, and as we all know, no other two words could have such opposite meanings...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:26 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 01:17 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I'm harping on measuring and testing because those things are pretty important. When you have can't measure/test there is a good reason to entertain them.. They could make you happy. If there is no way to measure/test why not?

Do you believe that there is an invisible fairy floating two feet above your head at all times? Why not? There is no test or measurement you can do to prove there isn't.

Do you believe that you will wake up tomorrow knowing how to speak a dozen different languages that you don't know today? Why not? There is no test or measurement you can do to rule out this possibility.

Do you see how goddamn silly your argument is?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:34 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:15 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 02:03 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That's still incoherent.

What is necessary for a belief to make you happy? It must necessarily be a belief that affects you in some way if it is true. Otherwise, who gives a shit?

You've now limited your consideration to things that are sufficiently defined that one can assess some "happiness" value, and yet simultaneously so completely undefined that no knowledge about them does - or even can - exist. It would seem to me that the intersection between those sets is null.

Not to mention the continued presupposition that it's possible to exercise choice in belief...

I stated nothing about a belief, again a straw-man.

First; just responding to something and saying "That be a fallacy!" is itself fallacious.

Secondly; given the topic at large, and your wording to which Cjlr replied, 'belief' is implicit: for instance, in the post to whcih Cjlr replied, you stated:

Quote:If Y can not be said about X/nonX
and entertaining X makes you happy
entertain X

What, exactly is X supposed to be if it is not supposed to be a place-holder for any given 'belief'?
When you began this thread you used virtually same basic structure to describe why belief in an afterlife is 'rational'.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 02:55 PM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2014 02:59 PM by Switz5678.)
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
Yes I have changed my tone throughout this post because individuals taught me otherwise. I have admitted choose to believe was a bad choice of words a couple of times already.. How could you have missed it? didn't read it I guess.

What I mean by this entertain/choose to believe is pretty much hope. Perhaps that is the best way to put it..

I don't believe that there is an afterlife, but I realize that there is an undefined possibility. I then decide to entertain an afterlife because that scenario makes me a net happier individual.

if entertaining the idea of an invisible fairy made me more happy then yes I would.

Do I believe i'll wake up tomorrow and know a dozen different languages?

No, I do not. I don't believe this because I know that the probability of this happening is close to zero.

Do you not see the difference between an invisible fairy, and learning languages? In one case we know what it takes to learn, and can make a reasonable assessment of this probability.. In the other we can't because we don't know shit about shit to be frank.

I do feel silly, but not because of my argument. I feel silly sitting here defending what is at best a weak crutch that might make me more happy. I don't want to get in a verbal sparring match, and I sincerely hope that nobody felt attacked. I just think that there is a fundamental misconception of probability, and how its applied. That is what has kept me here
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 03:01 PM
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:55 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  Yes I have changed my tone throughout this post because individuals taught me otherwise. I have admitted choose to believe was a bad choice of words a couple of times already.. How could you have missed it? didn't read it I guess.

What I mean by this entertain/choose to believe is pretty much hope. Perhaps that is the best way to put it..

I don't believe that there is an afterlife, but I realize that there is an undefined possibility. I then decide to entertain an afterlife because that scenario makes me a net happier individual.

if entertaining the idea of an invisible fairy made me more happy then yes I would.

Do I believe i'll wake up tomorrow and know a dozen different languages?

No, I do not. I don't believe this because I know that the probability of this happening is close to zero.

Do you not see the difference between an invisible fairy, and learning languages? In one case we know what it takes to learn, and can make a reasonable assessment of this probability.. In the other we can't because we don't know how shit about shit to be frank.

I do feel silly, but not because of my argument. I feel silly sitting here defending what is at best a weak crutch that might make me more happy. I don't want to get in a verbal sparring match, and I sincerely hope that nobody felt attacked. I just think that there is a fundamental misconception of probability, and how its applied. That is what has kept me here

You don't need to worry about people feeling attacked in this thread. We've had worse slung at us than probability and arguably poor word choices.

We pretty much got called terrorists once. It was hilarious. Laughat

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 03:05 PM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2014 03:08 PM by cjlr.)
RE: Why you choose to not believe?
(31-10-2014 02:55 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  Do you not see the difference between an invisible fairy, and learning languages? In one case we know what it takes to learn, and can make a reasonable assessment of this probability.. In the other we can't because we don't know shit about shit to be frank.

I disagree. Vehemently.

I think it is more likely that I wake up speaking a different language tomorrow than that there exist invisible faeries.

Regardless: why does the notion of faeries make you happy? I cannot think of a way to answer this without referring to some external phenomenon - in which case you must refer to some degree of observation, analysis, testability, whatever...

(31-10-2014 02:55 PM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I do feel silly, but not because of my argument. I feel silly sitting here defending what is at best a weak crutch that might make me more happy. I don't want to get in a verbal sparring match, and I sincerely hope that nobody felt attacked. I just think that there is a fundamental misconception of probability, and how its applied. That is what has kept me here

I don't feel attacked at all. I was just very unsure of what you were trying to say - and what I did think I understood did not make sense to me.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: