Which side makes a better case?
avatar
8 Comments
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • a year ago

    I would love to see these probability charts. I’m pretty sure they will all be equal considering that impossible things have a probablity of zero.

    • a year ago

      @madmike But you’re presupposing that a creator is impossible. That requires faith.

      There’s a difference between that which is impossible and that which is unknowable. I think you may be right that the human mind is incapable of comprehending/accurately verifying a creator, but that doesn’t mean such a creator is impossible.

    • a year ago

      @sharkb8 I am not presupposing that a deistic creator is impossible. I believe it is demonstrably and logically true that no defined creator exists beyond the most generic of deistic gods. That renders any Bayesian bet impossible because all the equations solve to zero

  • a year ago

    If you are going about success, Hinduism is the most successful. Non deistic claims about god include impossibilities which would render a Bayesian analysis to conclude not to bet.

  • a year ago

    Belief in God, being a matter of faith for the believer, can be outside the purview of rational thought, at least for them. But even if one makes the judgement as an outside observer, rational thought does not require proof of an idea to justify it. Belief in an idea is often a driver for any rational thinking, even scientific exploration.