View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)   [ ]
Old 03-09-2009, 04:07 PM
Foo Foo is a male Canada Foo is offline
Send a message via Skype™ to Foo

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton, AB
View Posts: 2,291
Re: Is bashing religion in general counter-productive?

But I'm afraid you misunderstand me (and terribly, at that). I am against bashing other religions or worldviews and generalized hate. This by no means, however, eliminates questioning and critique. (In fact, you'll notice in my post I said that it was good for atheists to criticize those aspects of religion that are in need of scathing criticism.) I'm all for spirited debate and rigorous questioning of any belief. But bashing and hate for other views? Never.
The problem is that your trusting a dividing line which is actually almost impossible to draw.

Here in SD, we see everything from brash arguers who have no qualms about making completely emotional investments in their debates, to meeker empathizers who see the smallest interpersonal conflict as offensively destructive (though I'll admit the latter is often a symptom of the frustration the stems from the board failing to see things "my way"). When you convince yourself that nothing but sore feelings can possibly arise from argument (as seems to be the case with a number of posters in this thread) then *any* debate - however rational - looks needlessly violent.

No, you are assuming that I meant that there is an equal possibility either way. All I am saying is, there is a one in one chance God may exist. If he does, he can't not exist, and if he doesn't he can't exist.
Your confusing two different schools of probability here. While you're argument certainly applies to a discussion of Frequency Probability*, your applying it to subjects (specifically epistemology) which require instead the use of Bayesian Probability... and the Bayesian credence to the proposition that "An Interventionalist God Exists" is (under an empirically accountable determination) zero.

*Edit: Note that for my determination here, I'm allowing for a being who is capable of repeatedly testing the existence of God with a guaranteed 100% accuracy to calculate p. FooMan is making the same allowance, as far as I can tell.
Last Edited by Foo; 03-09-2009 at 04:42 PM. Reason: Reply With Quote