tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post1858297264907807891..comments2023-07-04T07:30:28.590-04:00Comments on Skeptic Mormon: The Cosmological ArgumentUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-10441630118485495022011-12-23T15:41:59.779-05:002011-12-23T15:41:59.779-05:00One more idea: everything is based on probabilitie...One more idea: everything is based on probabilities. Nonfalsifiable claims without evidence are not probable, so we usually just ignore them. Falsifiable claims with lots of good evidence to back them up are very probable. And we should pay attention to them. Few things can be proven with absolute certainty. Therefore we deal with probabilities in assigning epistemological certainty to different Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05407541616547727967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-68895220153754481152011-12-23T14:20:10.511-05:002011-12-23T14:20:10.511-05:00Because it's impossible to rule it out. It'...Because it's impossible to rule it out. It's not falsifiable.. This is a characteristic if many religious or pseudoscientific claims. Nonfalsifiable claims are worthless because you also can't prove them either. Science, however, make claims that can be falsified. And that's what makes these claims so strong (see Popper).Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05407541616547727967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-73810313414781850962011-12-23T12:22:59.041-05:002011-12-23T12:22:59.041-05:00But why can't we rule it out? Just because som...But why can't we rule it out? Just because something is conceivable doesn't necessarily mean it's possible.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07418691476618587542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-34861287875549143492011-12-21T17:13:12.553-05:002011-12-21T17:13:12.553-05:00Exactly. See Russell's teapot analogy. You can...Exactly. See Russell's teapot analogy. You can't rule it out, but there is no reason to believe it's there.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05407541616547727967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-4595087533104091892011-12-21T12:28:06.490-05:002011-12-21T12:28:06.490-05:00Oh ok. I thought you were an atheist but for some ...Oh ok. I thought you were an atheist but for some reason it kind of came across a couple posts ago that you were going to list reasons why you believe in a god.<br /><br />Thanks for the clarification.<br /><br />Do you agree with the idea that "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"?<br /><br />It seems to me that the word "know" brings Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07418691476618587542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-54498554641551409542011-12-20T21:30:25.583-05:002011-12-20T21:30:25.583-05:00No I don't. Not very probable. But refuting th...No I don't. Not very probable. But refuting the cosmological argument (which I, and many others have) only refutes an argument for God's existence. It does not prove anything beyond that. We need to get into arguments for atheism (such as the problem of evil) before we can say that there are good reasons to NOT believe in God. All we've done with poking holes in the cosmological Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05407541616547727967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519340563994202668.post-43271954883445901562011-12-20T18:44:27.588-05:002011-12-20T18:44:27.588-05:00How comfortable are you with applying the logic of...How comfortable are you with applying the logic of your concluding paragraph to something you know doesn't exist?<br /><br />I assume you don't believe that a Santa Claus exists?Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07418691476618587542noreply@blogger.com