1. Marked by a disposition to find fault or raise objections.
2. Calculated to entrap or confuse, as in an argument.
~~~~~~~
We needn’t be agnostic about quantum gravity or string theory or dark matter or the multiverse. Hypotheses are claims to knowledge and insufficient claims are appropriately labeled. All our knowledge is imperfect and subject to continual revision. Why, then, is knowledge of god any different?
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that we’re 75 years ago, and the effects of dark matter are first being observed. The reason why we needn’t be agnostic about something like dark matter is that as evidence accumulates, our hypothesis is better understood. What evidence can be found supports the knowledge claim to the existence of the object—in this case, dark matter. If someone proposed dark matter, and evidence was not yet found, people needn’t be agnostic about whether or not dark matter existed—instead, two alternatives appear: If sufficient evidence shows it exists, then it should be believed. If no or insufficient evidence comes to the fold, then it should not be believed.
I do not think the argument for god is any different, despite its human-universal importance (that is, universal importance, but only in regards to humans). If there is insufficient evidence, one is not unreasonable to say one does not believe in a deity. Similarly if sufficient evidence did arise, one would not be unreasonable, then, to accept the new, more tenable proposition that the deity does indeed exist.
In matters of inquiry, room must always be left for new evidence, and even when what some consider to be the oldest superstition is in play, this is still the case. But if the argument concerned dark matter instead of god, and there were insufficient evidence, would you say “we cannot know if there is dark matter”, or would you say “dark matter probably doesn’t exist” and change your mind if and only if the evidence changes?
Knowledge is not a static thing. It can and must change in response to input. When we say we “know”, what I think we’re stipulating is “we know now, on what evidence is provided” not “we know for sure, forever” (as some Skeptics would claim is the only real knowledge). We work with what powers we have, but I think we do ourselves a service to pick up primarily what we have evidence for, and trust primarily that.
7 comments:
"I do not think the argument for god is any different, despite its human-universal importance (that is, universal importance, but only in regards to humans). If there is insufficient evidence, one is not unreasonable to say one does not believe in a deity. Similarly if sufficient evidence did arise, one would not be unreasonable, then, to accept the new, more tenable proposition that the deity does indeed exist."
Cause and effect...god made it all<-who created god?
How did Mother Teresa know exactly what day a cease-fire would be held on. A cease-fire allowing enough time for sisters and her to enter the city and retrieve children?
Her explanation: "knowledge through Mary, asked through prayer."
"Pre-cognition?"
"Lucky, I guess"
Does one persons sufficient evidence constitute as another person's sufficient evidence?
A: "I prayed to god that I would make it out of the plane crash alive. And I made it out alive. All those dieing around me..I prayed. 'He' saved me. I know god exists. What better than the answer of my own prayer to provide sufficient evidence for me to know god exists."
AA. "I made it out of the plane crash alive. I do not believe in god. All those dieing around me, I knew I was stronger. I survived because of my own, independent actions. I did not survive because of god. I survived because I am an Olympic deep sea diver escape expert. There is insufficient to supply the knowledge that god exists."
Who's evidence is sufficient?
In the first case, I personally think there are better explanations than prayer for how that person escaped, especially considering people's penchant for attributing god's will to fortuitous incidents. Sufficient evidence would find god not merely hiding behind the scenes and saving some people (while leaving many, many more to die or experience harm), but evident in our lives and in situations that do not involve questionable sensory or psychological experiences.
But what of example A. I believe that person would know god to exist no matter what, having had a "one on One" experience.
To A, there is sufficient evidence. It is not unreasonable for them to know in god.
To you, it is insufficient evidence. It is not unreasonable for you to not believe in god.
"To A, there is sufficient evidence. It is not unreasonable for them to know in god."
This suggests to me that the notion of "sufficient evidence" requires an objective, or at least intersubjective, basis. Otherwise, anything can be sufficient evidence for any belief whatsoever, making a mockery of the very notion.
What he said. Haha.
Sufficient evidence would have to exist outside of the self for others to believe one's convictions--and hopefully one is not so naive to believe that only their ideas and experiences alone explain reality, and that such a complete description need not check against referents (such as evidence in reality and the opinions of others) to be correct.
Only after a соmρгehensivе assesѕmеnt can a
suсcеssful treatment plan bе ԁevised.
The term aromatheraρy iѕ misleading. Moѕt of the time, plantаr fasciitis ρaіn therаpу іs easily сonducted at
home with еxеrcіse, rest and relaxation.
Ӏt workѕ on sore & tired musсles аs
a tool to prevent іnjuries. Within thе course of the ming dynasty (1368-1644), pediatric massage theгapу or
tuina evolѵеd іnto a hіgher fοгm of theraρy which is ѕtill applied nowaԁays?
?? Ӏ've picked these oils for their relaxing, sensual, or refreshing qualities. Regular massages can contribute to a healthier immune system. I see the huge guys that need massage because their muscles are so hyper-tonic (chronically contracted), and at the opposite extreme, women over 40 that never worked out habitually throughout life and so their large back muscles and core muscles are weak, which causes low back or thoracic pain.
Feel free to surf to my site; tantric massage
My web site - browse around these guys to learn about erotic massage in london
Post a Comment