Is there a God?

Post by **hierachy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:01 pm

get him, make him stop!

Post by **Revan** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:02 pm

LOL! Anyways, Back to the topic. Er...Is there a God........

Post by **Furls Fire** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:05 pm

in a word....yes

Post by **MixoLocrian** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:11 pm

Brinn wrote: However even if I did not believe in God it could be argued, via Pascal's Wager, that belief in God is a statistically logical and mathematically sound position. Look at the table below describing the possible outcomes for Pascal's Wager:

| ___________________|___God Exists__|__God Does not Exist_|
|_Believe in God_______|___Reward____|__No Ramification____|
|_Do Not Believe in God_|__Punishment__|__No Ramification____|

Believing in God superdominates wagering against God: the worst outcome associated with wagering for God (No Ramification) is at least as good as the best outcome associated with wagering against God (No Ramification) and if God exists, the result of wagering for God is better that the result of wagering against God.

Certainly this is a cynical and selfish way to establish a personal belief system however, purely from a logical standpoint, it is sound provided that the probability for Gods existence is greater than zero.

Pascal has always fascinated me at the same time a bit worried me. Now, don't get me wrong, I respect Pascal enough to believe that he had something important to say here; but could you please unpack this idea a bit more? Its a bit hard to see straight through for a number of reasons. Probability of God's existance of lack of existance is really not applicable when you have to consider faith. Either you belief God IS, ISN'T, or you are un-decided. It makes little sense to say "Well, god *might* exist, depending on wether the correct pebble was pulled from the sack."

Another sort of "problem" with this argument at its current point is that its putting two faiths together as being all the permutations of possiblities. What about a theoritical third belief, where if you DO believe in God throughout your life you are punished and if you live you life out NOT believing in God, you are rewarded? Maybe God finds it immoral for humans to belief in him when they are so obviousily confused and wretched creatures :/ (yeah, I can't really think of a good way for this to work, but you get the idea, right?).

So, anyways, could you unpack Pascals idea a bit further?

Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:26 pm

There's no real point in not believing in god it doesn't hurt anybody if you do...you don't have to DO anything...just nod your head, do good things and keep your mouth shut...It's always good to have all your bases covered just in case. And above all BE NICE!!!!

Post by **Revan** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:28 pm

Be nice? I am nice. *kils everyone in the room* Mr nice-guy actually.

Post by **CovenantJr** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:28 pm

Hmm, this Pascal thing is interesting. I haven't come across it before...

Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:34 pm

Did it ever occur to you that I may not be talking to you sir? I'm looking for my friend who comes here sometimes...

Post by **hierachy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:36 pm

Post by **Brinn** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:38 pm

Excellent observations Mixo! You have pointed out the fundamental flaws in Pascal's Wager.

Mixo wrote:Probability of God's existance of lack of existance is really not applicable when you have to consider faith. Either you belief God IS, ISN'T, or you are un-decided. It makes little sense to say "Well, god *might* exist, depending on wether the correct pebble was pulled from the sack."...

Another sort of "problem" with this argument at its current point is that its putting two faiths together as being all the permutations of possiblities. What about a theoritical third belief, where if you DO believe in God throughout your life you are punished and if you live you life out NOT believing in God, you are rewarded? Maybe God finds it immoral for humans to belief in him when they are so obviousily confused and wretched creatures :/ (yeah, I can't really think of a good way for this to work, but you get the idea, right?).

I agree with you.

Pascal's Wager does not account for your assumptions. My point was simply to show that belief in god could be defended from a logical realists perspective (In practice I truly don't believe that anyone can choose to truly believe in something simply out of convenience). I added the bit about the probability of God's existance because some have attacked Pascal's Wager stating that without an assumption about the probability assignment of God's existence, the argument becomes invalid. The counter argument states that rationality does not require you to wager for God if you assign a zero probability to God existing. In other words this argument only makes sense if there statistical uncertainty for Gods existence. To me this is a circular argument however it is true from a strict statistical perspective.

For further info on Pascal's Wager click Here

Thu Dec 04, 2003 6:16 pm

not you scaly one...

Post by **Revan** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 6:17 pm

Post by **hierachy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 6:21 pm

Oh

and i thought I finaly had a freind...

Post by **Revan** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 6:26 pm

LOL! arrrrr poor Hierachy, I'll be your friend!

Post by **dANdeLION** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:47 pm

Hierachy wrote:Oh and i thought I finaly had a freind...

You're surrounded by friends. Unfortunately, they're all figments of your imagination.

Post by **hierachy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:48 pm

Your wrong dAN, tell him Mr giggles...
...
...
...
see?

Post by **dANdeLION** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:50 pm

Hierachy wrote:Your wrong dAN, tell him Mr giggles...
...
...
...
see?

Okay, I see Mr. Giggles too, so he's real. But all the others are fake.

Post by **Vain** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:54 am

Zephalephelah wrote:
Vain wrote:
Zephalephelah wrote: I deserve to be here just as they do. And should someone find it intolerable, who unlike you actually has power here you little boy, then I'll come back as a different login but the same person again & again & again & again & again. Because I feel slighted you cretin, closed-minded, arrogant, pathetic, little worm.
My 2 cents worth here.

Carry on like this and I will take you out - permanently.

Oh, so we're to death threats now is it?

You called me a name, wah, where do you live, I'm gonna beat you up, wah. STFU!

For the record, Zeph has been banned. Any objections to this, please send me a PM and I may reconsider.

Post by **Zephalephelah** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 2:42 am

Vain wrote:
Zephalephelah wrote:
Vain wrote: My 2 cents worth here.

Carry on like this and I will take you out - permanently.

Oh, so we're to death threats now is it?

You called me a name, wah, where do you live, I'm gonna beat you up, wah. STFU!
For the record, Zeph has been banned. Any objections to this, please send me a PM and I may reconsider.

For the record, I told you before, I'm unbanable. Now STFU! before I get mad again.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 2:49 am

Do you have any clue how many IPs I can generate?

STOP HARRASSING ME!!!!!

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch

Is there a God?