If you toss a coin 100 times, would you predict:

- All heads
- All tails
- 50/50

It's the 3rd. The question 'was the universe created?' is of the same nature - boolean answer, no reason to suspect a non-normal distribution in the answer, so 50/50 is the correct probability to assign. — Devans99

I wouldn't predict any, because I don't have to, and because I am more sensible than that. I would say that a 50/50 result would most likely be closest to the actual result, which could be anything.

But anyway, you can't reasonably jump from your coin example to the creation of the universe. So what's your argument about the creation of the universe?

@Devans99

I have been there with his argument on the creation of the universe. I personally think it's flawed by an epistemological and metaphysical basis.

Well I have argument that builds on the 50/50 and concludes that there is a 91% chance that the universe is a creation:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/269837

Creation implies a creator. So I think for some people, these two questions (creator/god) are similar, for other people they are very different. It depends on the definition of God... if its 'magical' in some sense (3Os) then they are different questions in my opinion. But for some people, with some types of definition of God, the question 'Is there a God?' can be tackled inductivity.

Please explain the flaws...

But what if the coin was six dimensional, had four faces, magic powers, ate cornflakes for breakfast, but also not conflakes for breakfast, and was made of rubber and also cake, but was also a hippopotamus? Why can't we just admit we don't know what side it will land on?

But what if the coin was six dimensional, had four faces, magic powers, ate cornflakes for breakfast, but also not conflakes for breakfast, and was made of rubber and also cake, but was also a hippopotamus? Why can't we just admit we don't know what side it will land on? — StreetlightX

You can think of induction as a two stage process:

- Make an initial guess. 50/50 is appropriate for boolean propositions
- Refine the guess in the light of the evidence for/against the proposition

I think this is maybe what our brains do subconsciously for us all the time.

Well I have argument that builds on the 50/50 and concludes that there is a 91% chance that the universe is a creation: — Devans99

You can't build on thin air.

You can't build on thin air. — S

Fantastic counter argument :(

But what if the coin was six dimensional, had four faces, magic powers, ate cornflakes for breakfast, but also not conflakes for breakfast, and was made of rubber and also cake, but was also a hippopotamus? Why can't we just admit we don't know what side it will land on? — StreetlightX

:grin::up:

Fantastic counter argument :( — Devans99

Hitchen's razor. You have yet to justify your starting point.

Hitchen's razor. You have yet to justify your starting point. — S

I have. It is correct, in the presence of no evidence either way, to start at 50/50 for an estimate of an unknown boolean proposition with normally distributed answers.

I have. It is correct, in the presence of no evidence either way, to start at 50/50 for an estimate of an unknown boolean proposition with normally distributed answers. — Devans99

Okay, so long as we both acknowledge that a working assumption is not a justification. I will check out your argument when I have time. I'm about to start work.

But if it is an already presented argument with objections not properly dealt with, then that should be the starting point. Let's not act like amnesiacs.

I honestly am not in the habit of raising busted arguments.

what you are saying makes sense — Frank Apisa

Good!

All that "believing" nonsense. You just cannot call your blind guesses...blind guesses. You have to call them "believing."

You ought to figure out why you do that.

Anyway...you do make sense...providing, of course, that you logic out the window. — Frank Apisa

Again, thanks for agreeing that I make sense!

You don't really provide an argument or anuthing here except trying to say I'm illogical. But I'll still give you an example of how you can know something doesn't exist:

You know how many hands you have. It's probably two, barring special circumstances. You know you don't have three hands. You can search up and down your body and not find a third hand. You have zero proof of a third hand. But you do have a lot of lack of evidence in favor of a third hand. You're perfectly justified in claiming you KNOW you have two hands and no third.

Anyone who tells you (or me) it's illogical to know you don't have a third hand has very simply lost touch with reality.

This is actually an inaccurate definition — Maureen

According to?
That's a pretty standard definition because it basically says that if your justified belief corresponds with reality then it is true and then it is knowledge. It's got nothing to do with absolute certainty.

Also, you are not correct in claiming to know that there are no Gods if there are indeed Gods in spite of the absence of evidence. I — Maureen

I'm just gonna copy and paste what I told Frank about that.

You know how many hands you have. It's probably two, barring special circumstances. You know you don't have three hands. You can search up and down your body and not find a third hand. You have zero proof of a third hand. But you do have a lot of lack of evidence in favor of a third hand. You're perfectly justified in claiming you KNOW you have two hands and no third. — NKBJ

Anyone who tells you (or me) it's illogical to know you don't have a third hand has very simply lost touch with reality. — NKBJ

I would not say that I don't know if there is a refrigerator in my kitchen, because I do know this — Maureen

So apparently you think that some evidence is enough evidence to make an empirical claim. How much evidence and/or what manner of evidence is enough?

I honestly am not in the habit of raising busted arguments. — Devans99

Well, I'm sure you don't mean to do so...

"I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't."

^Correct me if am wrong, but it sounds like you are just admitting that you don't know whether or not God exists. So is there a reason why you can't just admit this without an explanation? Keep in mind that if I had written this post and I had simply said "nobody will admit that they don't know if God exists," this would sound like I was just making an assumption that nobody knows if God exists without anything to base it on. Therefore I had to explain that there may be every reason to believe that God does not exist, but that God may still exist even in spite of this, so therefore nobody knows if God does or does not exist. Otherwise it wold sound like I was just saying that nobody knows if God exists just because I wanted to believe this, not because there is an actual legitimate reason why nobody knows this like the reason that I explained.

You can present all of the evidence you want to support your claim, but at the end of the day you may as well just admit that you don t know if God does or does not exist, because that is the actual truth. — Maureen

Allow me to be a little argumentative and question this assertion. So, back 2000-2500 years ago when the theory of atoms (atomos) was first stated, was it out of certainty or reasonable expectation (intuition)? I think the theories about God and consequent beliefs are based on such a criteria. It's not about certainty, it's about intuition, predominantly a reasonable expectation which may or may not be enhanced by superstition.

"if your justified belief corresponds with reality then it is true and then it is knowledge."

^What is reality though? Is reality that earth revolves around the sun or that gravity causes objects to fall to the ground? The truth is that these things are NOT "reality", nor is anything else, because there is NOTHING that is known to be 100 percent "true" or "real." Even if something is known to be 99.9 percent true, you still do not know if it is true, because there is a 0.01 percent chance that it is not true. That being said, we are not even talking about percentages here or HOW sure anyone is that God exists, we are simply talking about the fact that God MAY exist, even if there is a very strong possibility that God does not exist. So all I am doing is admitting that I don't know if God does or does not exist, and neither does anyone else since nothing at all is known to be 100 percent true or real. It does not matter if you argue about evidence or how likely it is that God does not exist, this does not and will never change the fact that no one knows anything at all with 100 percent certainty, including whether God does or does not exist.

I guess you would claim you don't know you don't have a third hand then.

I am not talking about intuition or reasonable expectation though, I am simply talking about the fact that no one knows whether or not God exists, just as no one knows anything at all with 100 percent accuracy, even if there is a 99 percent chance that something is true or you can reasonably expect that it is true. The 99 percent may or may not apply to the existence of God, but there is a possibility nonetheless that God does or does not exist, regardless of any evidence or percentage that supports either side of the argument.

Let me put it this way:
If there is a 1 percent chance that God exists, then you do not know if God exists.
And...
If there is nothing to suggest that God exists, and you also have every reason to believe that God does not exist, then you still do not know if God exists, since there is nothing at all that is known 100 percent to be true.
This is the only point that I am trying to make, that no one knows if God exists for the reasons that I have described, even in spite of any evidence and in spite of how sure they might or might not be.

Yes, I do not know if I have a third hand, and neither do you or anyone else know if you have a third hand either.

:rofl:

I think you've missed the point about what/who God is to the believers. For them, in so many ways, God does exist. In the least, God is the creator of this reality (universe/world/life) for them and, since we're real, then how can that which made it possible not be real.

I think you're expecting God to be someone/something that appeals to the senses. However, God could be equally real as an object/subject of mind (and be related to logic - by logic I mean the laws which govern reality). God could be representative and abstract and still be real. That's because, fundamentally, everything is based on reality. It's just a question of, "in what way is God real (for you)?"

I think the best argument against God is that He/She/It is generic or derivative. There's no story which starts with God but somehow people manage to fit God into everything. But, for most believers, that doesn't matter anyway. And neither does it matter to logicians. Because, it's not where to start, it's whether the connection is feasible within the bounds of that reality.

I think you should not dismiss God or faith which you clearly do not understand because that sword cuts both ways. Your ignorance of God and people's faith cannot validate your arguments.

S
9k

Correct...which is why I would not make it.

I merely say that I do not know. — Frank Apisa


Ah, okay, so you've changed your stance. You've scrapped the 50/50 thing. :up:

(By the way, I would strongly warn you against spamming the forum. If you keep that up, I predict you'll end up being banned). — S

I HAVE NEVER SAID 50/50...EVER. HERE OR ANYWHERE ELSE.

Never...ever.

You got that?

I do not spam...nor do I flamebait. So take your warnings and store them where the sun will not get to them.

Devans99
1.2k

Ah, okay, so you've changed your stance. You've scrapped the 50/50 thing — S


I think the question 'is there a God?' is not a 50/50 proposition.

But the question 'was the universe created?' is a 50/50 proposition. — Devans99

50/50 70/30 60/40...is all nothing but guesswork on both questions.

I have no idea if there are any gods...I have no idea if the universe was "created"...and I am adult enough to simply acknowledge that.

Some people just cannot do that.

NKBJ
718

what you are saying makes sense — Frank Apisa


Good! — NKBJ

Only if you disregard logic, though. You must have missed that part.