Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Spectrum of theistic probability

socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 1:14:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Where is everyone on the spectrum of theistic probability?

(1)Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."

(2)Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. "I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."

(3)Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."

(4)Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."

(5)Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."

(6)Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. "I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."

(7)Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung 'knows' there is one."
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
jmar8542
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 1:17:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
(6)Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. "I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree, you can fvck off." - Richard Dawkins
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 1:22:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. "I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 1:29:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
this is jesus
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 1:54:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd say I'm a 2. I support God's existence but don't consider it beyond the realm of possibility that he could not exist.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 2:22:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Personally I am a 6. All evidence that I have seen for god's existence seems faulty at best. De-facto Atheist.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 5:16:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/12/2011 1:22:16 AM, askbob wrote:
Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. "I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."

Number 2
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 7:25:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would be a sound 1.
I feel all positive arguments for Atheism have been refuted.
I also have consistent encounters with Truth of the claims of the Christian Religion.
I aslo have consistent encounters with the Holy Spirit.
I also have encounters with Demons.
I also have encounters with God himself.
I have had one direct encounter with an Angel.

These things above are listed from more to less frequent experiential confirmation of a sound 1.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 12:47:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/12/2011 7:25:35 AM, Gileandos wrote:
I aslo have consistent encounters with the Holy Spirit.
I also have encounters with Demons.
I also have encounters with God himself.
I have had one direct encounter with an Angel.

important man. I would love to hear more
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 2:01:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm definitely a 1!
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 1:40:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

I'd say this myself, of course though I'm not a 6, I'm at the other of the spectrum - a 2. There's complex arguments for both sides, but no absolute blow to make a 1 or 7.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 11:41:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

Because they can't exist, however "God" could still create/instigate/design the universe, what would you call that thing - Bill the helpful universe gnome?
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 2:48:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm a 2. I cannot prove or disprove His existence, not even to myself; but I am sufficiently convinced of His logical necessity, and christian theology having the best explanation for the evil I observe daily, I choose to believe.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 3:19:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

What would you call a demiurge in the absence of any superior entity? You could be forgiven for calling it God, yet it would not have a single omni value.


"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

It is called philosophy, you wouldn't get it.

In any case I am a 6.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
jmar8542
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 3:21:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

But how can anyone be a 7? No, god can't exist, and neither can zeus or unicorns. In our dimension, at least. How can you possibly know that, in all possible timelines, in all possible infinities, in all possible universes that no god exists, with your mere third dimension perception?
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree, you can fvck off." - Richard Dawkins
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 4:29:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

Because there are many definitions of "god" and the fact that "God" with a capital G, understood as omni-etc.. being, may not exist... And furthermore, the term "god" doesn't need to actually apply to any sort of omni-excellent being, as clearly evidenced by Greek/Roman mythology, where gods were far from omni-excellent, save, perhaps, for their omni-imperfectionism...

Pretty obvious, really.

"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

Both these statements evidence an egregious misunderstanding of the difference between "god" and "God."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

I'm sure you'll come around once you actually understand what I said above.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 5:09:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 3:19:37 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

What would you call a demiurge in the absence of any superior entity?

A demiurge or a creator. Even the Greeks used the word "demiurge" or "unmoved mover" instead of God because it's not a God that they proposed.

You could be forgiven for calling it God, yet it would not have a single omni value.

God is an omni-excellent being who possesses all compossible perfections.

"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

It is called philosophy, you wouldn't get it.

That's not a relevant, nor valid response. In fact, it's not even coherent given the statements that you are responding to.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2011 5:19:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 4:29:43 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

Because there are many definitions of "god" and the fact that "God" with a capital G, understood as omni-etc.. being, may not exist... And furthermore, the term "god" doesn't need to actually apply to any sort of omni-excellent being, as clearly evidenced by Greek/Roman mythology, where gods were far from omni-excellent, save, perhaps, for their omni-imperfectionism...

Actually, the Greek philosophers challenged the notion that the so-called gods were actually gods. Plato and Aristotle actually came up with their own philosophies about the demiurge and unmoved mover because of the fact that they rejected the Greek gods as actually being gods. So it is actually an error to refer to the Greek pantheon as gods.

"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

Both these statements evidence an egregious misunderstanding of the difference between "god" and "God."

Well, usually "god" is used when there are multiple deities and "God" is used to refer to a single omni-excellent deity.

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

I'm sure you'll come around once you actually understand what I said above.

I suppose you can get away with accepting that there might be imperfect deities that you call 'gods,' that would still be erroneous as explained by the Greek philosophers.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2011 4:32:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 5:09:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/13/2011 3:19:37 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/12/2011 6:14:41 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Mark me down as a 6. But I would argue that anyone who claims to be a 7 or a 1 is, to put it succinctly, incorrect.

Although, I am technically ignostic, but I find most people's notion that what they mean by "god" exists to be nothing short of idiotic. So I live my life on the assumption that there is no god, and that if there IS a god, he is certainly not "God" as understood to be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc...

That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

What would you call a demiurge in the absence of any superior entity?

A demiurge or a creator. Even the Greeks used the word "demiurge" or "unmoved mover" instead of God because it's not a God that they proposed.

You could be forgiven for calling it God, yet it would not have a single omni value.

God is an omni-excellent being who possesses all compossible perfections.

Again if there was only a demiurge, and no superior being, might it not be the case that people could be forgiven for calling that God.


"if there IS a unicorn, it is certainly not 'Unicorn' as understood to be as a horse with one horn on its head."

"if there IS a zeus, it is certainly not 'Zeus' as understood to be as a white bearded man who wields lightening rods."

If this really is the justification for your not being a 7, then that's quite sad really.

It is called philosophy, you wouldn't get it.

That's not a relevant, nor valid response. In fact, it's not even coherent given the statements that you are responding to.

It is easier to ignore than to debate.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2011 4:34:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/13/2011 5:19:03 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/13/2011 4:29:43 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 3/13/2011 6:01:16 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
That's retarded. If it's none of those things, why call it God?

Because there are many definitions of "god" and the fact that "God" with a capital G, understood as omni-etc.. being, may not exist... And furthermore, the term "god" doesn't need to actually apply to any sort of omni-excellent being, as clearly evidenced by Greek/Roman mythology, where gods were far from omni-excellent, save, perhaps, for their omni-imperfectionism...

Actually, the Greek philosophers challenged the notion that the so-called gods were actually gods. Plato and Aristotle actually came up with their own philosophies about the demiurge and unmoved mover because of the fact that they rejected the Greek gods as actually being gods. So it is actually an error to refer to the Greek pantheon as gods.

Appeal to authority.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2011 4:49:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/14/2011 4:34:02 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/13/2011 5:19:03 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/13/2011 4:29:43 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
Because there are many definitions of "god" and the fact that "God" with a capital G, understood as omni-etc.. being, may not exist... And furthermore, the term "god" doesn't need to actually apply to any sort of omni-excellent being, as clearly evidenced by Greek/Roman mythology, where gods were far from omni-excellent, save, perhaps, for their omni-imperfectionism...

Actually, the Greek philosophers challenged the notion that the so-called gods were actually gods. Plato and Aristotle actually came up with their own philosophies about the demiurge and unmoved mover because of the fact that they rejected the Greek gods as actually being gods. So it is actually an error to refer to the Greek pantheon as gods.

Appeal to authority.

Indeed.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat