|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 5, 2021 20:46:53 GMT
Just because a belief makes one happy, does not mean it's rational. Thank you. You're welcome. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 20:53:30 GMT
I agree, and I've said I agree about a million times. Science also doesn't know the truth about the existence any being you can imagine; the question is why is it rational to believe in any of them. Why is it rational to stick your nose into billions of other people’s thoughts? Again, rationality is relative to truth, which is relative to factual questions about reality; it's not really relevant to desires, goals, and motivations. If it was, I could simply say "I enjoy doing it" (not that I do) and it would be rational, presuming I should do what I enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 20:54:54 GMT
The evidence is that there isn't any evidence God exists. There isn’t any evidence that God doesn’t exist either. The only evidence possible that something doesn't exist is a lack of evidence that it does, so there absolutely is evidence God doesn't exist. I explained this in detail several pages ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 20:55:55 GMT
Why is it rational to stick your nose into billions of other people’s thoughts? Science doesn’t know the truth. You are pushing what you want to be true. |
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 20:57:09 GMT
There isn’t any evidence that God doesn’t exist either. The only evidence possible that something doesn't exist is a lack of evidence that it does, so there absolutely is evidence God doesn't exist. I explained this in detail several pages ago. This doesn’t apply to the spiritual world. It’s why science doesn’t know the answer. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 20:59:24 GMT
The only evidence possible that something doesn't exist is a lack of evidence that it does, so there absolutely is evidence God doesn't exist. I explained this in detail several pages ago. This doesn’t apply to the spiritual world. It’s why science doesn’t know the answer. Special pleading.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 20:59:31 GMT
4) Maybe "falsehood" is the wrong word, but you're essentially saying it's rational to believe something with no evidence or reason to think it's true other than that it makes you happy. Would you say any of these statements are rational: "Believing I have a billion dollars in my bank account makes me happy. You can't prove I don't, so I'll choose to believe it." "Believing I'm the reincarnated spirit of Jimi Hendrix makes me happy. You can't prove I'm not, so I'll choose to believe it." "Believing in The Flying Spaghetti Monster makes me happy. You can't prove it doesn't exist, so I'll choose to believe it." "Believing in Santa Clause makes me happy. You can't prove he doesn't exist, so I'll choose to believe it." "Believing we're all living in the matrix makes me happy. You can't prove we aren't, so I'll choose to believe it." "Believing Donald Trump actually won the 2020 election makes me happy. You can't prove he didn't, so I'll choose to believe it." God is no different than any of these things. The only difference between belief and knowledge is the confidence level. Knowledge is something you might be 99.99% certain is true, while you can believe anything that reaches a subjective threshold that you think is true. So how confident are you that God exists? 50%? 66%? 75%? 90%? And what evidence/reasoning did you use to get to that level, keeping in mind that "it makes me feel good" is not evidence that God exists? Oh my goodness Eva, this is so stupid. You are lucky I'm home sick. Otherwise I wouldn't have the time to go through this foolishness. - I can prove how much money I have in the bank. So believing isn't necessarily. - I don't believe in reincarnation. - I've never heard of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. - I used to believe in Santa Claus when I was a child. But then I grew up. - I don't see any evidence for believing in a matrix. And no compelling reason to believe in any matrix. - I never voted for Trump. I don't want him to be president. And all the judges --- even ones he appointed --- say there is no evidence of fraud. I have good reason to believe in God. No good reasons to believe in those other things. I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove how much money they have in the bank, so would it be rational for them to believe they have a billion dollars if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove they are the reincarnated soul of Jimi Hendrix, so would it be rational for them to believe that if it makes them happy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_MonsterI wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove Santa doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in Santa if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove the matrix doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in the matrix if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about.... oh, hell, I think you get the gist by now. Your reason is the same as the other reasons by those hypothetical people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:00:06 GMT
Science doesn’t know the truth. You are pushing what you want to be true. I agree. Which is...?
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:01:16 GMT
The only evidence possible that something doesn't exist is a lack of evidence that it does, so there absolutely is evidence God doesn't exist. I explained this in detail several pages ago. This doesn’t apply to the spiritual world. This is what you said back then, which is when I posted passages from The Bible showing how God interacts with the physical world and should thus be testable in the same way he was testable in The Bible. I've also asked you for any evidence for the spiritual world or any reason to believe one exists. You've offered nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 21:01:22 GMT
I have good reason to believe in God.
—————
This is spiritual, not physical.
The anti-religion religion can’t admit the difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 21:03:04 GMT
Emo, we live in the physical world.
We have no way of using physical tests on anything spiritual.
You’ve had this explained to you a million times.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Jan 5, 2021 21:05:10 GMT
Oh my goodness Eva, this is so stupid. You are lucky I'm home sick. Otherwise I wouldn't have the time to go through this foolishness. - I can prove how much money I have in the bank. So believing isn't necessarily. - I don't believe in reincarnation. - I've never heard of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. - I used to believe in Santa Claus when I was a child. But then I grew up. - I don't see any evidence for believing in a matrix. And no compelling reason to believe in any matrix. - I never voted for Trump. I don't want him to be president. And all the judges --- even ones he appointed --- say there is no evidence of fraud. I have good reason to believe in God. No good reasons to believe in those other things. I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove how much money they have in the bank, so would it be rational for them to believe they have a billion dollars if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove they are the reincarnated soul of Jimi Hendrix, so would it be rational for them to believe that if it makes them happy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_MonsterI wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove Santa doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in Santa if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove the matrix doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in the matrix if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about.... oh, hell, I think you get the gist by now. Your reason is the same as the other reasons by those hypothetical people. Each person is different. It would depend on the individual, and their individual situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:06:28 GMT
Emo, we live in the physical world. We have no way of using physical tests on anything spiritual.You’ve had this explained to you a million times. We do if the spiritual interacts with the physical, like raining fire down on bull-altars, or answering prayers, or healing the sick, or helping believers survive venomous serpent bites, or causing locust plagues, or parting the red sea, or causing global floods, or speaking to people through burning bushes, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:07:43 GMT
I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove how much money they have in the bank, so would it be rational for them to believe they have a billion dollars if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove they are the reincarnated soul of Jimi Hendrix, so would it be rational for them to believe that if it makes them happy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_MonsterI wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove Santa doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in Santa if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about YOU, I was talking about a hypothetical person making that argument. YOU cannot prove the matrix doesn't exist, so would it be rational for them to believe in the matrix if it makes them happy? I wasn't talking about.... oh, hell, I think you get the gist by now. Your reason is the same as the other reasons by those hypothetical people. Each person is different. It would depend on the individual, and their individual situation. Sorry, but no. Rationality does not depend on differences in people. That's like saying science depends on differences in people. You're basically promoting a relativist view of rationality, which is utterly bizarre.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 21:08:25 GMT
Emo, ask scientists to perform tests on God.
They will either laugh in your face or call you a nut.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 21:09:51 GMT
Science has no answers about God.
Many scientists and doctors believe in God.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 21:11:26 GMT
Emo, ask scientists to perform tests on God. They will either laugh in your face or call you a nut. You mean like when they tested the efficacy of prayer?
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:12:27 GMT
Emo, ask scientists to perform tests on God. They will either laugh in your face or call you a nut. Science has performed tests of God, including looking for evidence of a global flood (there isn't any), looking for evidence that prayer helps people (it doesn't), looking for evidence of Noah's Ark (there isn't any), etc. Again, if God doesn't exist, the only evidence he doesn't will be a lack of evidence that he does. We've done plenty of tests, and no evidence has come forth so far. Plus, if you're basically saying that God is unfalsifiable (which, according to The Bible he is not, but never mind) and that's NOT a good thing for your belief, as then we're right back to square one with me asking you what rational reason is there to believe in something for which there is no evidence of any kind. You keep going back to the "spiritual" thing, but refusing to answer why you believe the spiritual realm exists at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 21:12:36 GMT
Emo, ask scientists to perform tests on God. They will either laugh in your face or call you a nut. You mean like when they tested the efficacy of prayer? Did scientists do this? LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 21:13:46 GMT
|
|
