Define god/s.

Define god/s. — 180 Proof

I would say the best definition is something to the effect of, being/s that created the universe.

Putting god/s inside the frame of existent/non existent condemns us to limit the discussion inside that frame, preventing a widening, expansion of horizons beyond that frame, preventing us from thinking about god/s with ideas really worth to be applied to god/s. If you think your god/s exist/s, then you have put your god/s in a cage; if you think that god/s do not exist, you have put your atheism in a cage as well.

Sorry, but I think such speculations are ridiculous.

I am interested in how people assign probabilities. — Down The Rabbit Hole

First try to understand what a probability is.

Sorry, but I think such speculations are ridiculous. — jgill

Surely there could be arguments for and against god/s that adjust the likelihood we should put on their existence?

First try to understand what a probability is. — L'éléphant

Probability is the extent to which something is likely to be true or false etc. We can do a rough calculation of this.

Probability is the extent to which something is likely to be true or false etc. We can do a rough calculation of this. — Down The Rabbit Hole

Incorrect. Please try again.

probability (noun) · probabilities (plural noun)
the quality or state of being probable; the extent to which something is likely to happen or be the case.

the quality or state of being probable; the extent to which something is likely to happen or be the case. — Down The Rabbit Hole

That's not what you said in your previous post.

That's not what you said in your previous post. — L'éléphant

the extent to which something is likely to be true or false etc. — Down The Rabbit Hole

the extent to which something is likely to happen or be the case. — Down The Rabbit Hole

Almost word for word. What are you picking a fight for?

.

:clap:

Another issue with the OP is that the God of monotheism is not *a* God, one God amongst many. Believing in the Gods, as polytheistic religions do, is quite a different thing to faith in God, at least according to monotheism. They would insist that the Biblical God is not simply an instance of a type.

It should also be mentioned that 'existence' is the wrong word for God. 'What exists', as far as we can know, are phenomena, 'that which appears'. In classical philosophy and theology, the first principle/umoved mover/first cause is not 'something that exists' - to say that 'it exists' is to relegate it to the domain of appearances, a being among other beings or thing among things. That gets into the domain of apophatic theology which is probably too specialised for this forum, but ought to be noted.

Of all possible worlds, maybe 10% have gods. I can't see why they're needed.

Okay. Well, to my mind, such "god/s" are impossible (0%).

:up:

Sorry, but I think such speculations are ridiculous. — jgill

Agree.

As an aside, wasn't it theologian Paul Tillich who said god doesn't exist? This would locate god in the quotidian and rob the 'ground of being' of its transcendent significance.

:smirk:

Yes, exactly. But the first place I encountered articulation of the idea was in Terry Eagleton's review of Dawkin's The God Delusion:

Dawkins speaks scoffingly of a personal God, as though it were entirely obvious exactly what this might mean. He seems to imagine God, if not exactly with a white beard, then at least as some kind of chap, however supersized. He asks how this chap can speak to billions of people simultaneously, which is rather like wondering why, if Tony Blair is an octopus, he has only two arms. For Judeo-Christianity, God is not a person in the sense that Al Gore arguably is. Nor is he a principle, an entity, or ‘existent’: in one sense of that word it would be perfectly coherent for religious types to claim that God does not in fact exist. He is, rather, the condition of possibility of any entity whatsoever, including ourselves. He is the answer to why there is something rather than nothing. God and the universe do not add up to two, any more than my envy and my left foot constitute a pair of objects. — Lunging, Flailing, Mispunching

(It was that review which led to my discovery of Internet Forums, around 2008 or so.)

Good engineering exists.

Surely there could be arguments for and against god/s that adjust the likelihood we should put on their existence? — Down The Rabbit Hole

I think the problem is the specificity of the idea of god. It is a very common tradition on Earth and we are acclimated to thinking about the notion. But if you were to hear the idea for the first time, you would have a lot of questions. There are good reasons why we search religious texts looking for the accounts of witnesses.

If we have little/no information, then why would we jump to that specific conclusion?

Why is it a single being instead of millions of beings? Wouldn't a god be just as likely to champion evil concepts? Why does a god need to usher us into another existence right after we die?

We have already decided what we want these answers to be prior to asking the questions. Sounds less like an unbiased investigation and more like fulfilling our needs.

I deleted my last post to @Down The Rabbit Hole because upon reading it myself, it sounded so rude. I then realized that when posting in response to a post I disagree with, I should be très poli lest I'd be labeled picking a fight, which is not my intention. Sometimes, posts that disagree could come across as impolis.

My heart tells me God exists, P(G) = 100%

My mind tells me God doesn't exist P(G) = 0%

P(G) = The probability that God exists.

I think the most reasonable percentage is 50%
Because there is neither proof nor the other way around.

That is, does God exist? maybe.

Proof that people who believe in god are far more likely to vote in ridiculous polls.

That seems about right to me.

When considering philosophical arguments for and against god it may nudge us a further 10% or so, one way or the other?

Results suggest the opposite? :grimace:

First try to understand what a probability is. — L'éléphant

think the most reasonable percentage is 50% — SpaceDweller

Most interesting! — Ms. Marple

So, out of 100 universes, 50 have a god and 50 don't! In other words, god isn't a necessary being (true for all worlds). Theists should be leaping with joy! :snicker:

When considering philosophical arguments for and against god it may nudge us a further 10% or so, one way or the other? — Down The Rabbit Hole

If you're trying to turn this pool into average % that's a clear bias because the result will be positive regardless of how many people vote for 0% :smile:

Okay. Well, to my mind, such "god/s" are impossible (0%). — 180 Proof

It's metaphysically possible.

If you're trying to turn this pool into average % that's a clear bias because the result will be positive regardless of how many people vote for 0% — SpaceDweller

Yes, the poll is just to see how people assign probability.

All but a couple of respondents have a solid belief as to the existence/non-existence of god/s.



Gotcha. I'm not sure how professional pollsters deal with those that would prefer a particular option being more/less likely to respond to the survey.