|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 23:20:23 GMT
OK, now we're moving on to the God issue. What you're arguing is that your belief in God is rational relative to your desire to be happy. However, the issue of something's existence is not dependent upon your desires. The sun, moon, stars, grass, animals, trees, rocks, etc. all exist regardless of whether you want them to exist or not. Their existence is in no way dependent upon your desires. God's existence is the same way, it's completely independent of your subjective desires. Truth, IN GENERAL, is completely independent of your objective desires, and rationality is about the reasoning we use to form true beliefs. This is why saying "it's rational to believe in God because it makes me feel good" is fundamentally different than something like "it's rational to take your asthma medicine." The latter is totally dependent upon someone's subjective desire to live. The existence of God is not dependent on any subjective desire. To believe in something that may or may not exist based on a desire rather than evidence is a textbook logical fallacy. To deny this is to basically deny the entire field of rationality and logic. If what you're saying is true, then you should rewrite the entire "Wishful Thinking" entry on Wikipedia because, according to you, that's not even a logical fallacy. ########## We've already agreed on that. Just like the former is totally dependent on someone's subjective desire to be happy. I've literally read this post half-a-dozen time to make sure I'm not making a mistake, but it seems you are saying completely contradictory things in back-to-back sentences: 1. We agree that God's existence isn't dependent upon your desires. 2. But it's dependent on someone's desire to be happy. What?
|
|