Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,400 Year: 3,657/9,624 Month: 528/974 Week: 141/276 Day: 15/23 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pascal's Wager - Any Way to Live a Life
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 126 (432782)
11-08-2007 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Rrhain
11-08-2007 1:36 AM


Which god are you going to believe in?
The only one there can be.
There are plenty of gods out there...
Nope. Can be only one.
Too, and connected, isn't it interesting that the god you will typically believe in is the one your community believes in?
Is it?
It isn't like you're treating all the various conceptualizations of god equally.
At the same time, it isn't like doing so is impossible.
How can one conclude if the Wager is "authentic and intellectually honest" if one does not examine if the Wager is fallacious?
You've touched on just one of the many problems with the Wager: The assumption that we understand god's intentions. There are others.
The primary one being that any real God would not give mind to whether or not a handful of mollusks clinging to a measly rock acknowledged its existence.
Jon

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
En el mundo hay multitud de idiomas, y cada uno tiene su propio significado. - I Corintios 14:10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
A devout people with its back to the wall can be pushed deeper and deeper into hardening religious nativism, in the end even preferring national suicide to religious compromise. - Colin Wells Sailing from Byzantium
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[Philosophy] stands behind everything. It is the loom behind the fabric, the place you arrive when you trace the threads back to their source. It is where you question everything you think you know and seek every truth to be had. - Archer Opterix [msg=-11,-316,210]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Rrhain, posted 11-08-2007 1:36 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by bernerbits, posted 11-08-2007 4:57 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 22 by Rrhain, posted 11-09-2007 2:20 AM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 126 (432965)
11-09-2007 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Rrhain
11-09-2007 2:20 AM


And which one is that? Be specific.
The only One. There cannot be more than One.
Be aware that there are others who are just as sure that your choice is wrong
Let them be.
...and their evidence is just as strong as yours.
Doubtf'lly so.
Thinking you understand god's intentions.
I needn't understand God's intentions, merely Its nature, which is, in the general, discernable via logic.
Jon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Rrhain, posted 11-09-2007 2:20 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Rrhain, posted 11-09-2007 10:04 PM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 126 (432967)
11-09-2007 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phat
11-09-2007 6:18 AM


Re: Clarification of Pascals infamous Wager
Actually you won't find this phrase or anything like it in the Bible.
So, what does that tell you 'bout the Bible, eh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 11-09-2007 6:18 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Phat, posted 11-09-2007 4:56 PM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 126 (433242)
11-10-2007 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Phat
11-09-2007 4:56 PM


Re: Clarification of Pascals infamous Wager
I have always believed that God helps those who trust in Him with all their heart
Where has that gotten you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Phat, posted 11-09-2007 4:56 PM Phat has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 126 (433246)
11-10-2007 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Rrhain
11-09-2007 10:04 PM


God2 ≠ God
Nothing that is truly God shares its powers nor is subordinate to another entity. Logical thinking says as much.
Why? When was it shown that god was rational, sane, and logical?
Rationality, sanity, and logic are all that we have for understanding anything, including God. Any other method for understanding anything in the Universe is utterly foolish. There is no reason to let people think the Sun goes around the Earth when all logic says elsewise, and there is no reason to let people think certain things about God when all logic says elsewise. Logic is all we have for understanding anything; blind faith does not equate to understanding.
When in your life have you ever accepted major principles as truth if there was no logic to back them? Why is God any different?
Jon
Edited by Jon, : verb agreement

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Rrhain, posted 11-09-2007 10:04 PM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by crashfrog, posted 11-10-2007 7:23 PM Jon has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 126 (433761)
11-12-2007 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Phat
11-12-2007 8:03 PM


Re: How I came to believe the stuff I do
Because of it, we never are able to trust God.
With it, we continually attempt to grow up.
You must be kidding!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Phat, posted 11-12-2007 8:03 PM Phat has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024