Discussion: Evidence, etc.
Quick recap of the previous entry to put the notes in context:
My system for treating claims is: I believe a claim with confidence in proportion to what evidence/probability/logic would suggest. (So I answer the topic with no.)
A theist regularly acts as though he is not worried about evil elves, stepping on sidewalk cracks, or angry unicorns. Because they are preposterous claims, right?
But the reasons theists dismiss these claims and other possible claims are the same reasons theists should dismiss the claim that God exists.
So the theist, being consistent, would dismiss the claim that God exists or would be worried, in fact, about evil elves (and the like). Or, inconsistently, believing God exists but not other empirically empty claims arbitrarily.
Kind of like evolution heh? [BrotherJim]
I’m going to extrapolate on what Jim is asking – please let me know, Jim – if I’m reading you wrong.
I think Jim is saying that “Sure, I believe in God without empirical evidence/probability/logic. But you believe in evolution without empirical evidence/probability/logic.”
Here’s where the problem of believing with some uncertainty. Jim is assuming that his 100% confidence (and 0 uncertainty) in the belief in the existence of God in the absence of evidence/logic/probability is somehow like my “belief that evolution is true.”
Except that, Jim is assuming that I at least “believe in evolution” – which I could easily deny and get out of the problem that way. But I won’t.
From the evidence that I’ve seen, and the arguments that I’ve read, the “theory of evolution” seems to describe nature fairly well.
I’ll “believe” that evolution is right, with 10% uncertainty.
So, to answer your question, Jim, no. Nothing like evolution.
Jim, there’s at least some ‘evidence’ that would suggest that Evolution might be the answer. While it doesn’t prove anything 100%, it’s a hell of a lot better than the other side, which has no supporting evidence.
Later, [Peter_24601]
Exactly. And having “some evidence” would support “some belief”.
Do you have “some evidence” for God? And if so, do you have a corresponding “some belief”? Or are you all in?
“Some” evidence? [Zombywoof]
I understand your objection, but at the very least, every theist has to grant that there is *at the least* some evidence for it, which is all we need them to grant.
I don’t know if I would have believed in God if I hadn’t of experienced some really intense spiritual and concrete experiences. I know He exists, without a doubt. And Jesus too for that matter. It seems like there is proof, but the proof is given individually. What one may take as proof, the other may not. The only prerequisite to finding that proof is reaching out in faith 2him in the 1st place. [Lillia]
1. I am not asking for proof. I’m asking for *some evidence*.
2. Since you’ve admitted that the evidence you have is due to experiences that you had on your own, I’m sure that you don’t mind everyone else discounting *that* evidence for their own personal belief…right?
3. Your personal religious experiences are of the same nature as someone else who believes that the Koran is right. And since there is no way for us on the outside to figure out which of you is deluded (since at least one of you must be); we should reject both of your *experiences* as any basis for knowing something about reality.
a logical scientific reason for believing in G-D would be to reinforce hope into ones being. Im sure if we were taught that elves could help us out, or that they created us, or if they were included in the Bible…then we would put our faith in them. Having someone who always knows what is going to happen (Xtian-outlook), someone who will only let his will to happen, and someone you can always talk to when no one else is around….is extremely comforting and can help bring people out of depression and calm nerves. Yes, God could be replaced with breathing techniques or a comforting group of friends….but sometimes the human things we create let us down. If there is an unfailable being that will take care of us….that can replace alot of doubt and fear in our minds.
BUT, there isnt real 100% evidence. SO, I dont expect you to believe. I just know that I would have gone insane without having him to rely on. [Walabe84]
Brad, that is the most intellectually honest reflection of a Christian on his beliefs that I think I’ve read on this site.
I have more to say, but I’ll write it up another time.
Odd way to respond to “religious experience”. I think if you accept just one religious experience as valid then it constitutes evidence of an empirical nature. If you consider no religious experience valid than the argument of contrary experiences is a silly one to make. So I’m confused, specifically speaking to the note from lillia, did she have valid religious experience? …
Warning Comment
You’re a big fan of percentile of certainty, how certain are you that individuals have religious experiences? There’s a lot of people that claim they do. Are they liars? Is there another explanation, a socio/psycological one? What you seem to be saying is that lillia’s experience is invalid becasue a guy who believes in the Koran had an “Experience” besides sidestepping the issue …
Warning Comment
of religious experience as valid evidence, you also seem to commit a logical fallacy, especially since if religious expeeriences do occur it’s possible a guy who believes in the Koran, a shintoist, a hindi, a buddhist and a christian could all have the same experience and rationalize the experience within their belief structure.
Warning Comment
I’ll grant that an individual’s personal religious experiences might be valid evidence for their personal belief. But I don’t think that such experiences are valid evidence for anyone else’s belief.
Warning Comment
The fact that many people claim to have religious experiences is good evidence in my mind to think that they do in fact, believe that they have had a religious experience. So my uncertainty that “at least one person believes that he has had a religious experience” is very low. What reasons are there for this “belief”? Most likely psychological reasons and poor application of reason.
Warning Comment
roughly- lillia’s experience is invalid because other have religious experiences… That is invalid, but that’s not what I was meaning. If a person makes a claim that is entirely unverifiable and completely contrary to everyday experience, we should reject the claim until there is some verifying evidence.
Warning Comment
So testimony isn’t enough, personal disclosure isn’t evidence because she might be lying. Didn’t I suggest that? I’m not sure I agree, I mean with the logic of your statement. Testimony of a witness, even a sole witness, isn’t in and of itself suspect, otherwise our court sytems would have bigger problems then they already do. At this point you don’t even know what experience you’re objecting too
Warning Comment
I’m a skeptic, but I have had what could only be explained as a religious experience. It was hardly christian in the american fundamentalist’s sense, in fact those guys would call it heretical at worst, seditious at best. But I had one just the same, an epiphany of sorts. I know no amount of brow beating effects that it was a real event and it isn’t dependent on your acceptence ….
Warning Comment
I think my experience would be more acceptable to you, sight unseen, as it had no jesus or god, in fact you might have had a similiar experience to a much smaller degree. Also, that I haven’t come to any of what you would call crazy conclusions would make it more palatable to you. What it did teach me was to not automatically dismiss someone who claims to have had one. It alters you immeasurably.
Warning Comment
“Testimony of a witness, even a sole witness, isn’t in and of itself suspect, otherwise our court sytems would have bigger problems then they already do. At this point you don’t even know what experience you’re objecting to.” The problem isn’t the sole witness bit. It’s the sole witness + elements outside of our daily experience. Eye-witness to a carjacking – plausible. to unicorns – less so.
Warning Comment
But I will admit that I’m not clear on exactly what I’m dismissing here – but being that it is a “religious experience” I’m assuming that it’s outside our everyday experience. I could be wrong. “It alters you immeasurably.” – I don’t doubt that. And I don’t doubt that religious beliefs in general can change a person’s personality and behavior.
Warning Comment
So…I’m not clear on something…what to you is proof, what to you is evidence, and what is the difference between the two? When messing with Chaos, semantics is everything.
Warning Comment
So what you’re saying is that it’s ok for someone who has had an experience to believe however for those who haven’t quite had the same experience then they aren’t supposed to believe? Wanna back that up with scripture? I mean if someone chooses to believe something they don’t know and then realizes that it is true you can’t judge that either. The thing is it’s always either to say that because
Warning Comment
there is no proof for something, that it doesn’t exist. However I belive in “innocent until prooven guilty” this is America. So let God be innocent until you can 100 percent proove that he is guilty by lying to His people about existing and that He actually doesn’t exist. And you don’t know that Jim belives in God with 100 percent certainty, doubts can be easy to hide and are deeper then the
Warning Comment
skin allows you to see. But ryn: my V-day suked as well b/c I was supposed to go to a party and then got uninvited and I went to get my lisence and it was closed. Then my mom decided she wanted something to do with me but I didn’t believe her and didn’t trust her enough to take her as serious. It was just a bad day. Ah well crap happens.
Warning Comment
I wrote an entry about an experience relating to what we were discussing. If you’re curious — Hungry Ghosts and Epiphanies parts 1 and 2.
Warning Comment
bummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmbummmmmmmmbummmmmmmmmm
Warning Comment
what u think about “smile god loves you”‘s entry on your name?
Warning Comment
I was taught that God’s creation and the eveolution are not mutualy exclusive. Just because God planted the seed and watered and protected it until it came up and then set back does not mean the plant does not go on growing and changing into what it was intended to be. I am looking forward to your visiting my new diary.
Warning Comment