Deities do or do not exist?

[Jan Ardena]

a spirit does exist in a sense.. it is the energy that makes up your body and the energy that remains when your body dies..

once again im trying to make 20 posts to contact somone

Hi Malikaru,

Are you theist, or atheist.

jan.

 

[Enmos]

Jan, does god exist ?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Jan, does god exist ?

I believe God exists, yes.

jan.

 

[Enmos]

I believe God exists, yes.

jan.

Do you know god exists ?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Do you know god exists ?

Good question.
Not in the sense that I could say "here is God", and you would undeniably agree.
I would say that what knowledge I do have, leads me to understand that
God exists. So my knowledge of God is subjective.

jan.

 

[Enmos]

Good question.
Not in the sense that I could say "here is God", and you would undeniably agree.

If you said "Here is God" and you showed him to me, I think I would agree

I would say that what knowledge I do have, leads me to understand that
God exists. So my knowledge of God is subjective.

So you know god exists then, right ?
I don't see how knowledge can be subjective, it's either right or wrong.
Your assessment of the experiences you may have had are subjective, knowledge is just data.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Enmos,

If you said "Here is God" and you showed him to me, I think I would agree

Would you?
It would still rely on your acceptance.

So you know god exists then, right ?

It is more a case of accepting that God exists.
This is the same thing we are discussing in another thread.

I don't see how knowledge can be subjective, it's either right or wrong.

We acquire knowledge to 'understand' and to 'know' something.
If we come to the conclustion that God does, or does not exist
that ultimate knowledge is subjective, because it has to be accepted.

Your assessment of the experiences you may have had are subjective, knowledge is just data.

We obviously agree.
So what is the purpose of your questioning?

jan.

 

[swarm]

I know, but one could argue that once you accept that the person is there then you also accept (edit: or more accurately, you have no reason not to accept it) that he's wearing either a white hat or a black hat. That leaves only two choices.
So, in that case, if you do not believe that the person is wearing a white hat you must believe that the person wearing a black hat.

Just because you acept a person is there doesn't mean you must accept the have a hat or that the hat must be black or white. Theye are no necessary causal relationships between people and head gear or head gear and color.

But the "god" question is even more nuanced that that which is where the objection comes in.

The theist is trying to use language which implies that there is a god and the atheist just doesn't believe it as opposed to the truth that the theist has failed to establish any reason to even consider believing there is a god.

It would be much clearer if the dialog went:

theist: I believe in my god.
atheist: So what?

 

[swarm]

Since we are all CREATED would that necessarily imply a creator or creators ?.

I don't know about you but I was grown, not created.

 

[Pete]

Dawkins allows the possibility that God exists, but considers the probability roughly the same as fairies living at the bottom of the garden.
I allow a slightly larger probability for God than fairies, but still consider it negligible.

 

[S.A.M.]

Dawkins allows the possibility that God exists, but considers the probability roughly the same as fairies living at the bottom of the garden.

I believe he's a 6.9 out of 7 these days.

I allow a slightly larger probability for God than fairies

6.8? Why?

 

[(Q)]

So my knowledge of God is subjective.

jan.

Then, you should believe everything that is subjective, if not, you cherry pick your beliefs to suit your agenda. In other words, you really want to believe there is a god and so you do believe. It has nothing to do with knowledge.

 

[(Q)]

I believe he's a 6.9 out of 7 these days.

And, repeating this in every thread isn't spam?

 

[Cris]

sam,

I cannot possibly have no belief [unless I am brain dead]. I could say I don't know, in which case my belief is that I don't know.

The "don't know" position is identical to an absence of belief in the two primary options?

Your admission to a third option, a third belief, if you like allows us to elliminate the need to choose either "I believe God exists" or "I believe God does not exist".

The belief that I don't know necessarily means I have NO belief that God exists, and NO belief that God does not exist.

Put simply - regarding the question of existence of gods, I lack belief.

 

[Cris]

signal,

In that case, one would have to be silent, not even saying "I have no belief that gods do or do not exist."

Which is exactly the position of science in this matter.

And it is my position.

But on the practical side what would you expect me to say to someone who asks me the question of whether gods exist or not? Just look at them dumbly and shrug my shoulders, that doesn't work well in an online debate forum.

Simply pointing out that there is nothing to say should be considered perfectly acceptable.

 

[S.A.M.]

But on the practical side what would you expect me to say to someone who asks me the question of whether gods exist or not? Just look at them dumbly and shrug my shoulders, that doesn't work well in an online debate forum.

It does actually. Its called "not clicking on the reply button".

A lot of agnostics avail of this feature, because unlike pseudo-agnostics, they truly have no position on the matter

 

[Cris]

sam,

A lot of agnostics avail of this feature, because unlike pseudo-agnostics, they truly have no position on the matter

How would you know? If someone does not communciate thay have no position then it is a fallacy to assume they have no position. They might well have a very strong position but do not wish to discuss it.

Neither can you claim or quantify "a lot" since if they are truly silent you have no way to count whether silence means no position or not.

And this is simply foolish. There is nothing wrong with letting people know that you have no beliefs on a certain issue.

 

[S.A.M.]

Its easy enough to figure out who the agnostics are. If you do ask them directly, they tell you they have no opinion on the issue. And how do we know they are not lying? Because thats generally all you'll hear from them about it.

 

[wynn]

There generally is:
Those that have the belief that god exists (single intellectual position) act as though god exists.

Not quite so, though, as can be witnessed by the many lamentations of many theists about how inadequate their behavior is in regard to proper theistic conduct.

But certainly there are some activities of some theists that suggest they have a belief in God, so in this sense there is a some more or less direct relationship between a person's intellectual stance and the way they act.

All others (multiple intellectual positions) act as though god does not exist.

The problem arises with this latter group when you try to assess their intellectual position from the way they act.

Granted, speculating about a person's intentions based on observing their actions is unreliable.

However, we cannot but do just that, either. We cannot be truly neutral or indifferent toward others, as much as we might want to. We observe a person's behavior and then we speculate about their intentions that might have led to that behavior. If we wouldn't do that, we would undermine our own reliance that there is a connection between intellectual position and behavior - something which we rely on when it comes to our own behavior.

If intellectual position 1 leads to A, but 2, 3, 4, and 5 lead to B... then if you start from A you know it came via 1. But if you start at B it is unknown whether it came from 2, 3, 4, or 5.

It all comes down to what is accepted as the criteria for determining whether an action is considered theistic conduct or not. There isn't a generally accepted set of such criteria.

 

[wynn]

But on the practical side what would you expect me to say to someone who asks me the question of whether gods exist or not? Just look at them dumbly and shrug my shoulders, that doesn't work well in an online debate forum.

Online debate forums are not exactly an authority on matters, are they ...

Simply pointing out that there is nothing to say should be considered perfectly acceptable.

But it's often not considered perfectly acceptable, by either atheists or theists.

Actually saying that you have "nothing to say" tends to indicate that you do have something to say - at least that your position is somehow important in the matter. In which case it is open to explore why your opinion that you have none should be important in an online debate forum.