|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Subjective Evidence of Gods | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3457 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined:
|
quote:That's kinda the point. You believe your god exists, but not the others. Why? You don't have to believe in the worship system or that any other god is as powerful as yours, but why don't you believe that they exist? Those believers have the experiences to believe just as you do. How can you say that your god exists and their s doesn't? quote:And yet you state that the Bible is true. Now you're implying that only your subjective evidence is valid or reasonable. How can we tell which subjective evidence is valid and which isn't? quote:That's why I mentioned the healing issue. Even amongst believers there are those who pray for healing and don't receive it. If an answer to prayer is subjective evidence for God's existence for an individual, then unanswered prayers are subjective evidence against God's existence for an individual. Believers don't usually take unanswered prayers as evidence against their god's existence. Let's look at the prayer evidence you presented in Message 3 concerning your shoulder. 3 John 1:2 isn't a prayer to God. The author is simply wishing his reader well. IOW, he's saying; "I hope this letter may find you well." From a Biblical standpoint it isn't a prayer and does not profess to confer healing if used as such. From an objective plain reading, the letter has nothing to do with healing. Another believer can speak the same words and receive no relief. So was your shoulder healed by your God, a different god, your own mind (meditation), or the warmth of your hand? Other than belief, can you tell which one it is? Have you tried praying to another god for healing? Subjective evidence isn't really a viable choice to determine the existence of a being. Great for individual choices, but doesn't go much further than that. Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
We can look at the same evidence and subjectively come to different conclusions which goes back to the question in the OP. The point being that your observation ...
quote: ... stands as subjective evidence of some god(s) fails since the observation is fallacious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Panda writes: And I'll avoid listing the sizeable number of mistakes that were made, if this world was made ready for us... I think we are going off topic as this is supposed to be about subjective evidence. The subjective evidence is that we continue to survive, and even thrive, so in spite of the fact that you perceive what you consider mistakes, the positive obviously far outweigh the negatives. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
AZPaul3 writes: ... stands as subjective evidence of some god(s) fails since the observation is fallacious. Not at all. I said that it "appears to be made ready for us" which is saying that the observation itself is subjective. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3713 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
If your criteria for 'created ready for humans' is: "it hasn't completely wiped us out" then you have incredibly low expectations from a god. The subjective evidence is that we continue to survive, and even thrive, so in spite of the fact that you perceive what you consider mistakes, the positive obviously far outweigh the negatives.Considering how many billions of humans have died from viral infections, bacterial infections, diseases, earthquakes, volcanoes, animal attacks, etc, etc, etc... I see very little reason to think that this earth was created 'for' us. People complain about the actions of religion and politics and racism - but the real killer is the world will live on. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I said that it "appears to be made ready for us" which is saying that the observation itself is subjective. I can accept that. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Chuck writes: When I mention the Bible as subjective evidence im using it as evidence to me. That you find the bible personally convincing isn't evidence that God exists or anything else. Subjective evidence is just a way of conflating deep personal belief with a form of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Straggler writes: Subjective evidence is just a way of conflating deep personal belief with a form of evidence. The same can be said for any belief including atheism. However, I contend that it is possible for subjective evidence to be the basis of our deep personal beliefs. None of us came into this world holding deep personal beliefs. It had to start somewhere. I want from agnosticism to theism based largely on the subjective belief that there is an underlying moral code that is basic to our existence after reading CS Lewis. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7
|
after reading CS Lewis. I have never thought Lewis' arguments were particularly compelling. Actually they seem quite simplistic to me. I am not sure I would go as far as this guy(looks like it is John Loftus).
C.S. Lewis was an idiot But I think he makes some valid arguments against Lewis. Here is a more scholarly refutation of Lewis and his arguments.
C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational ReligionBy John Beversluis Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
after reading CS Lewis.
I have never thought Lewis' arguments were particularly compelling. Actually they seem quite simplistic to me. I am not sure I would go as far as this guy(looks like it is John Loftus).
C.S. Lewis was an idiot But I think he makes some valid arguments against Lewis. Here is a more scholarly refutation of Lewis and his arguments.
C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational ReligionBy John Beversluis quote:From Message 689
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Hey GDR
GDR writes: The same can be said for any belief... Some beliefs have a firmer evidential basis than others.
GDR writes: ... including atheism Well I would argue not. As per Inductive Atheism GDR writes: However, I contend that it is possible for subjective evidence to be the basis of our deep personal beliefs. It may well be the basis in the sense that it is the reason that a particular belief is held. But that is not the same a form of evidence is it?
GDR writes: It had to start somewhere. That good evidence leads to strong belief often leads to the mistaken conclusion that a strong belief must be based on valid evidence.
GDR writes: I want from agnosticism to theism based largely on the subjective belief that there is an underlying moral code that is basic to our existence after reading CS Lewis. That man is a moral animal is an observable phenomenon. To ask why man is a moral animal is a very valid question. But to take a question that demands an evidenced answer (such as why man is moral) and then cite the phenomenon that requires explanation as evidence for your subjectively preferrred cause (i.e. the Christian God) ultimately amounts to conflating deep personal belief with a form of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3457 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:That's pretty much the meaning of subjective. Subjective Based on (or related to) attitudes, beliefs, or opinions, instead of on verifiable evidence or phenomenon. Contrasts with objective. How is a belief evidence of gods? We all believe many different things as we go through our lives. We add them and drop them as our needs dictate. We also learn in life that belief that something exists doesn't mean that it does. If subjective evidence can be evidence for the existence of gods, it can also be evidence against the existence of gods.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7
|
I see Catholic Scientist wants to be the EVC policeman.
The post was an aside from the current topic. All I wanted to do was let GDR know that he should examine some criticisms of Lewis. He might want to know what others think of the arguments presented by Lewis. Since he repeatedly mentions his love for Lewis, I felt it was more than appropriate to point out that there are major flaws with the arguments that Lewis uses.
Those links which I have followed did not support your point in any discernible way, so if you think they support your point of view then it is incumbent upon you to explain how. If you followed the links you would see that these people also thought that the arguments put forth by Lewis were not very good arguments. If you want to discuss Lewis start a thread. I personally do not feel a need to pursue the subject more. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Theodoric writes: I have never thought Lewis' arguments were particularly compelling. Actually they seem quite simplistic to me. I actually have never laid claim to being the brightest light in the chandelier, but I personally did find Lewis' argument compelling enough to at the very least be open minded about it. Actually the more I have read various religious, and non religious writers over the years, the more convinced I have become. Frankly, in my subjective view, nothing makes as much sense of my life and the world I live in as Christianity. (That of course raises the question of which Christianity I'm referring to, but that is another question.) As far as the link CS Lewis is an idiot you included I suggest the title says it all. Not something you’d take that seriously. He makes the argument that there is no fundamental truth about morality as animals are capable of altruism. Frankly, as I believe in a God who created all life that is exactly what I would expect to see. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
As far as the link CS Lewis is an idiot you included I suggest the title says it all. Not something you’d take that seriously. He makes the argument that there is no fundamental truth about morality as animals are capable of altruism. Neither of you seem to have noticed that that was written by a crazed Christian fundamentalist.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024