Deities do or do not exist?

[wynn]

Have these other people seen or heard you and presented some form of evidence to this group, perhaps a photograph or a video? A hunch doesn't mean very much.

Those other people have brought letters and written speeches of you to the group in question.

Why? If they are saying unpleasant things about you which are true then it might be wise for you to stay silent and let them think you don't exist.

If such things are not true and you feel motivated to defend your image then you should present yourself and explain your case, how would they know otherwise? If you have no such motivation and do not care what others think of you then again stay silent and allow others to reach whatever conclusions they wish concerning your existence.

Would you defend your image or not?
Do you care what others think of you?

 

[Cris]

signal,

Those other people have brought letters and written speeches of you to the group in question.

So this is evidence of your existence. Then why are they asking you to prove your existence again?

Would you defend your image or not?

Only if it is in my best interests, i.e. assists with future survival, or there is some profit, or increases my happiness.

Do you care what others think of you?

Not if such others are inconsequential and can have no effect on my life.

But beyond all that, I cannot see where this "mental exercise" is leading. It does not appear to have a point.

 

[wynn]

So this is evidence of your existence. Then why are they asking you to prove your existence again?

Because they want more than mere letters and writings. They are convinced that what the letters and writings say shouldn't be taken at face value.

But beyond all that, I cannot see where this "mental exercise" is leading. It does not appear to have a point.

I wanted to see how a person would respond, what attitudes they would show, and how this can be projected on the attitudes people have about God and His showing Himself.

Only if it is in my best interests, i.e. assists with future survival, or there is some profit, or increases my happiness.

Not if such others are inconsequential and can have no effect on my life.

Perhaps God has the same attitude and doesn't make an effort to show Himself or otherwise make Himself known to those who do not act in His best interests.

In that mental experiment, you wouldn't step out of the room and meet the group unless it was in your best interests.

Why couldn't God be the same? Why couldn't God show Himself or otherwise make Himself known only to those who act in His best interests?

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Perhaps God has the same attitude and doesn't make an effort to show Himself or otherwise make Himself known to those who do not act in His best interests.

In that mental experiment, you wouldn't step out of the room and meet the group unless it was in your best interests.

Why couldn't God be the same? Why couldn't God show Himself or otherwise make Himself known only to those who act in His best interests?

Well then this god is only of use to the people who act 'in his interests' and is irrelevant to the lives of those who do not believe. In this scenario his existence or non-existence has no relevance to non-believers. If those who believe were obviously better off (or there was some obvious benefit) than those who did not believe then it might have more impact on non-believers but since who or who isn't better off is a random toss up then it doesn't really matter if one believes or does not...even if he exists.

 

[wynn]

Well then this god is only of use to the people who act 'in his interests' and is irrelevant to the lives of those who do not believe. In this scenario his existence or non-existence has no relevance to non-believers. If those who believe were obviously better off (or there was some obvious benefit) than those who did not believe then it might have more impact on non-believers but since who or who isn't better off is a random toss up then it doesn't really matter if one believes or does not...even if he exists.

How do you know that those who believe in God are not obviously better off than those who do not?

What do you understand by "someone is better off" than another?

Why do you think who is or who isn't better off is "a random toss up"?

 

[(Q)]

Let's do a mental experiment:

Suppose there are some people in one room. You are in the adjacent room. You can't see eachother, but you can hear them.

You hear the way they talk about you. They sound rather harsh. They demand that you should show yourself. They don't even call you by your name. They just say "Hey you, if you're there, come out, show yourself! If you don't, we'll be forced to believe you don't exist! Suit yourself!"


Would you go into the other room to meet those people?

I don't see any reason not to go into the room. What's your point? :shrug:

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

How do you know that those who believe in God are not obviously better off than those who do not?

What do you understand by "someone is better off" than another?

Why do you think who is or who isn't better off is "a random toss up"?

Exactly. How do you know that atheists aren't obviously better off than those who do believe? The truth is that depending on how one qualifies 'better off' its probably a toss up.

Why random toss up? Because of all the variables we could use to define someone as being better off, whether it be material or their state of mind you would find examples on both sides (believers and non-believers alike) who would qualify as examples of being 'better off'.

 

[iceaura]

iceaura,

Surely, as far as you are concerned right now, "God does not exist".
If you require evidence to convince you of Gods' existence, and from
your perspective, none is forthcoming, then your default position has to be
"God does not exist".

Yep. Note that you have a specific deity there - the Abrahamic "God" with the capital letter - and that I am making certain assumptions about your meaning based on your apparent intention and background here (for example: that your meaning of "exist" does not include "as a metaphorical or heuristic character in a story, protagonist in a work of fiction", etc. If the kind of existence that the whale Moby Dick enjoys, say, is included there, I have a different answer for you.)

How do you know that atheists aren't obviously better off than those who do believe?

Whether theistic people are better off is an interesting question - even apart from the question of whether or not they are deluded in their beliefs.

We have a growing body of evidence that certain apparent delusions are good for a person, or a society, on average over time.

 

[quadraphonics]

Yep. Note that you have a specific deity there - the Abrahamic "God" with the capital letter

This is an important point. I get the impression that a lot of the insistence that atheists simply must believe - affirmatively - that deities do not exist is motivated by the fact that most atheists do indeed believe that certain specific deities do not exist.

At which point it's important to note that many of the deities on offer for belief do not fall into this "untestable/unproveable" category that underpins the putative equivalence between the two camps. In fact, most are held to have observable effects in the material world, be amenable to prayer, be benevolent, etc. A deity confined strictly to the realm of faith would not be of much interest to many of the theists I've met, or so it seems to me.

 

[Cris]

signal,

Perhaps God has the same attitude and doesn't make an effort to show Himself or otherwise make Himself known to those who do not act in His best interests.

Sure, I can buy that. I build (create) many things (computers mainly) that I discard soon after building after i lose interest. It was the process of building that I found satisfying.

I could envisage a god who creates for the sake of it and then becomes bored or unhappy with what he created. Hmm, doesn't the bible say things like that? I don't like what my creations have done so I'll flood the world and kill pretty much all of them and start again.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Whether theistic people are better off is an interesting question - even apart from the question of whether or not they are deluded in their beliefs.

We have a growing body of evidence that certain apparent delusions are good for a person, or a society, on average over time.

Whether they are deluding themselves or not is besides the point as religious beliefs are only relevant in how they express themselves in the lives of those who live them, this is also true for those who hold beliefs but non that are based on god. In this sense you cannot qualify if a belief in god makes someone 'better off' than someone who does not as a 'non believer' can also hold beliefs that give them a sense of well being, a sense of purpose etc.

 

[wynn]

Exactly. How do you know that atheists aren't obviously better off than those who do believe? The truth is that depending on how one qualifies 'better off' its probably a toss up.

Why random toss up? Because of all the variables we could use to define someone as being better off, whether it be material or their state of mind you would find examples on both sides (believers and non-believers alike) who would qualify as examples of being 'better off'.

What do you think who is better off, atheists or theists?

 

[wynn]

Whether they are deluding themselves or not is besides the point as religious beliefs are only relevant in how they express themselves in the lives of those who live them, this is also true for those who hold beliefs but non that are based on god. In this sense you cannot qualify if a belief in god makes someone 'better off' than someone who does not as a 'non believer' can also hold beliefs that give them a sense of well being, a sense of purpose etc.

Surely atheists can also hold beliefs that give them a sense of well being, a sense of purpose etc.

But it does make a difference in a person's life how much their beliefs help them to make it through the various difficulties in life.

A person who has so far held belief B1, might at some point decide that in order to surmount the difficulties that have come into their lives, taking up belief B2 might be better.

And when this same principle applies to large numbers of people, some generalizations begin to be possible, and we can make some conclusions that B2 is better than B1.

(This is a basic principle in psychology anyway, for example.)

 

[wynn]

Well then this god is only of use to the people who act 'in his interests' and is irrelevant to the lives of those who do not believe. In this scenario his existence or non-existence has no relevance to non-believers.

Why not?


Not believing that X exists does not exclude you from being affected by X.

For example, a person may not believe in gravity or may be completely ignorant of what the term means, but that doesn't mean that gravity will not affect them.

 

[wynn]

Sure, I can buy that. I build (create) many things (computers mainly) that I discard soon after building after i lose interest. It was the process of building that I found satisfying.

I could envisage a god who creates for the sake of it and then becomes bored or unhappy with what he created. Hmm, doesn't the bible say things like that? I don't like what my creations have done so I'll flood the world and kill pretty much all of them and start again.

Perhaps in this regard, God isn't like you.

 

[wynn]

I don't see any reason not to go into the room.

You see no difference between people who approach you in a kind manner, and those who approach you in an unkind manner?

 

[Enmos]

Then how is it that your position is not "God does not exist" period?

jan.

Wtf? Do you have comprehension problems ? Reread your own question and my answer to it :bugeye:

 

[Enmos]

Could you just answer the question, please?


I'll say more later.

I think I would, unless I'd be afraid they would do something to me.

But Signal, your thought experiment is flawed. Of course I WOULD show myself if I wanted those people to believe in me.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Wtf? Do you have comprehension problems ? Reread your own question and my answer to it :bugeye:

I have, and have concluded that your explanation is nonsense.
Your position has to be that "God does not exist".

jan.

 

[Enmos]

I have, and have concluded that your explanation is nonsense.
Your position has to be that "God does not exist".

jan.

Whatever makes you happy.