|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 370 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is religion good for us? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikechell Inactive Member
|
From Merriam-Webster:
an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true
a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena But I'll defer to your definition and start using the term "hypothesis".evidence over faith ... observation over theory
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9142 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Look up scientific theory
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Wiki writes: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. But why must evidence be provided for a belief? Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Phat writes: But why must evidence be provided for a belief? If evidence could be provided for a belief, it would no longer be a belief it would be a fact. People don't believe in facts, they accept facts.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
My point is that you dismiss any and all beliefs...due to no evidence.
While this is your preference it is by no means the only option. Granted we believers may be engaging in fantasy but this is not a default conclusion simply because evidence is lacking.Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
Phat writes: My point is that you dismiss any and all beliefs...due to no evidence. You've only got part of it. Those that reject religion do it for many reasons - one of which may also be just a belief; a belief that it's all nonsense. Speaking for myself I reject it because there's no evidence at all for any of its precepts, but also that most of what religions thought/think were/are true have been factually shown to be incorrect. On top of that, much of bible based religious teachings are immoral and harmful and many of its teachers are corrupt and abusive. Religious history is littered with atrocities and is quite plainly simple a struggle for wealth and power. The entirety of it is shown quite easily to be a human construct. If there is a good side to all this, it's that everyday people have been able to build communities and support groups and had some comfort in thinking that all their pain and struggles in this life will be rewarded in the next. Opium for the masses.
Granted we believers may be engaging in fantasy but this is not a default conclusion simply because evidence is lacking. It damn well should be. Why would you accept anything as important as this on no evidence whatsoever?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 185 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
If there is no evidence to convict John of killing Keith we can't just say:
"But I believe he did". The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
If there is no evidence to convict John of killing Keith we can't just say: "But I believe he did". Of course we can. Haven't you ever believed someone did something that you couldn't prove they did?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikechell Inactive Member |
Granted we believers may be engaging in fantasy but this is not a default conclusion simply because evidence is lacking. The question should be, "Why one believes?" Not, "If one believes?" The "why," is to feel like one's life "means" something. To feel like one's suffering will be rewarded somehow, after death. Most people can't face the fact that they're just another animal on a planet of animals and there's nothing more important about them than that. Edited by mikechell, : No reason given. Edited by mikechell, : spellingevidence over faith ... observation over theory
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikechell Inactive Member |
If there is no evidence to convict John of killing Keith we can't just say:
Of course we can."But I believe he did". Haven't you ever believed someone did something that you couldn't prove they did? Fortunately, you can't CONVICT on belief alone.evidence over faith ... observation over theory
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
Fortunately, you can't CONVICT on belief alone. Absolutely right, in theory. In practice, it's a depressingly regular occurrence. (Which is sort of off topic - and I completely back your point that belief can never be used as a basis for harming another person in any way whatsoever.)Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 185 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Okay.
What I should have said was that we can't say "I believe he did it" and expect to get a conviction as there is no reason to suspect John if there is no evidence to inform that opinion. Abe: I'm talking about evidence, not proof. Edited by Larni, : No reason given.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
... we can't say "I believe he did it" and expect to get a conviction as there is no reason to suspect John if there is no evidence to inform that opinion. Hopefully not.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1414 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined:
|
Larni writes:
I agree with Jon that we can say exactly that. We just can't convict. If there is no evidence to convict John of killing Keith we can't just say: "But I believe he did". Not every matter is supposed to be approached like a criminal trial. As a society, we think it's preferable to acquit a guilty person than convict an innocent one. However, skepticism only protects us from making a type-1 error (accepting a false null hypothesis). There are plenty of cases where we act on little or no real evidence to avoid making a type-2 error (rejecting a true null hypothesis). We leave buildings when we hear a fire alarm instead of waiting for the sight of open flames; we take the kid to the emergency room when he falls off his bike instead of holding out until there's proof of bone breakage; and no offense, but we believe what pop science books tell us about the scientific consensus rather than reviewing the raw data first hand.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikechell Inactive Member |
... we believe what pop science books tell us about the scientific consensus rather than reviewing the raw data first hand. Or, (no offense intended) some believe what pop bibles tell them without reviewing the facts to the contrary. Edited by mikechell, : No reason given.evidence over faith ... observation over theory
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024