God exists

[sophie]

God does exist.

He's won 21 Grammys, he sits in French-ass restaurants, he likes fish sticks, and his last album got a 9.5 on Pitchfork.

Or maybe:

Link to video.

...schism?

 

[madviking]

Well you are suggesting that human spirit is made out of numbers ?

i dunno, it seems you were implying that much in your op by using the word 'data'. if the human spirit is made of 'does madviking know x?', where x represents everything, then yea, the human spirit seems kind of numerical in a way.

your concern seems to be on the infinite nature of statements like 'does madviking know that madviking know x?'. those statements are countable. the set of all x's is countable. afaik countable*countable is still countable.

What I dislike are answers that only seems to try confuse people instead of seeking answers.

There are lot of things that science cant explain, but we can observe them and make further conclusions. Logic and math cant be disproved while God cant be proved but can be easily disproved.

not so fast my friend. to quote descartes:

But, if the mere fact that I can produce from my thought the idea of something that entails everything that I clearly and distinctly perceive to belong to that thing really does belong to it, is not this a possible basis for another argument to prove the existence of God? Certainly, the idea of God, or a supremely perfect being, is one that I find within me just as surely as the idea of any shape or number. And my understanding that it belongs to his nature that he always exists is no less clear and distinct than is the case when I prove of any shape or number that some property belongs to its nature.

your assertion of logic/math being somehow fundamentally separate from god is sketchy. what's wrong with a god based in mathematics?

 

[Naokaukodem]

i dunno, it seems you were implying that much in your op by using the word 'data'. if the human spirit is made of 'does madviking know x?', where x represents everything, then yea, the human spirit seems kind of numerical in a way.

Human spirit is done so we have a sense of reality. And reality is by far more than mathematics.

your concern seems to be on the infinite nature of statements like 'does madviking know that madviking know x?'. those statements are countable. the set of all x's is countable. afaik countable*countable is still countable.

Well countable or not, it's still infinite.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So... you believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden, unicorns, goblins, elves, dwarves...

You know what, that there is just the beginning of a very long list of things you don't disbelieve. Ending with this invisible mouse I have, living in a matchbox.

Not disbelieving is a much different thing than believing. Not disbelieving makes it much easier to get along with people who keep invisible mice in matchboxes, for example.

It always amazes me that people who refuse to believe in anything that can't be proven find it so easy to disbelieve without a shred of proof required.

 

[Borachio]

It comes down to this: do I believe there's an invisible mouse in this matchbox or do I disbelieve it?

You're saying you don't disbelieve it, which means to me that you believe there is one.

I can't see there's any middle ground for you to occupy where you don't believe it but you don't disbelieve it.

Of course, neither of us knows whether there's an invisible mouse in the matchbox or not. Even if I can see there's a mouse doesn't mean I know there is one. That's why we have to talk in terms of belief. But that's besides the point, imo.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It comes down to this: do I believe there's an invisible mouse in this matchbox or do I disbelieve it?

You're saying you don't disbelieve it, which means to me that you believe there is one.

I can't see there's any middle ground for you to occupy where you don't believe it but you don't disbelieve it.

Of course, neither of us knows whether there's an invisible mouse in the matchbox or not. Even if I can see there's a mouse doesn't mean I know there is one. That's why we have to talk in terms of belief. But that's besides the point, imo.

How is there no middle ground? Believing is an action. Disbelieving is an opposite action. Taking no action is always an available option. That's an obviously available middle ground.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In everyday life I can see your point.

On a forum where the topic is: God exists, it invites disbelief. Because it invites voicing my opinion on the matter.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

In everyday life I can see your point.

On a forum where the topic is: God exists, it invites disbelief. Because it invites voicing my opinion on the matter.

Near as I can make out this forum is part of your everyday life.

That aside, it seems like an invitation that is easy enough to decline. "God exists"; hmmm, can't prove that or disprove that; moving on.

 

[Borachio]

But it's not a matter of proving or disproving. If it were it wouldn't be necessary, or possible, to believe or disbelieve.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

But it's not a matter of proving or disproving. If it were it wouldn't be necessary, or possible, to believe or disbelieve.

I acknowledge no necessity to believe or disbelieve. Whether I can prove something is a different issue from whether it can be proven, and either way there is still the question of the validity of the proof. So pretty much everything comes down to believe or disbelieve...or neither. In most cases I opt for neither.

How's your mouse?

 

[madviking]

Human spirit is done so we have a sense of reality.

so when you're talking "human spirit", what exactly are you talking about? a dualistic mind? a soul? or what?

And reality is by far more than mathematics.

citation needed

Well countable or not, it's still infinite.

i'm not worried.

 

[Borachio]

"Eek, eek, eek."

Seems to be fine. As far as I can tell. It's not easy to know, what with it being an invisible mouse, and everything.

 

[warpus]

It comes down to this: do I believe there's an invisible mouse in this matchbox or do I disbelieve it?

These are your options:

- I believe that there is an invisible mouse
- I do not believe that there is in invisible mouse
- I believe that there isn't an invisible mouse

 

[Timsup2nothin]

"Eek, eek, eek."

Seems to be fine. As far as I can tell. It's not easy to know, what with it being an invisible mouse, and everything.

Glad to hear it.

If you are happy with your invisible mouse in the matchbox, what purpose could me actively disbelieving possibly serve?

 

[madviking]

These are your options:

- I believe that there is an invisible mouse
- I do not believe that there is in invisible mouse
- I believe that there isn't an invisible mouse

it's not illogical say both "there's a mouse in this matchbox" and "i believe that there isn't a mouse in the matchbox"

 

[Borachio]

what purpose could me actively disbelieving possibly serve?

Hmm.

Well, at a certain point it's handy for us all to do a bit of fact checking on the old reality stakes.

Left to our own devices we'd all go drifting off centre into our own little realities. It's only because we periodically* take inventories over what's real and what's not that there's anything like a shared a reality for us to experience.

*This isn't true. We do this almost every waking moment.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

These are your options:

- I believe that there is an invisible mouse
- I do not believe that there is in invisible mouse
- I believe that there isn't an invisible mouse

I would rephrase that as 'I have no beliefs either way about the invisible mouse'.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Hmm.

Well, at a certain point it's handy for us all to do a bit of fact checking on the old reality stakes.

Left to our own devices we'd all go drifting off centre into our own little realities. It's only because we periodically* take inventories over what's real and what's not that there's anything like a shared a reality for us to experience.

*This isn't true. We do this almost every waking moment.

That's not fact checking, that's just agreement. We're all in our own little reality anyway, it's just comforting to agree that they are all by and large the same.

 

[Hygro]

I don't know if I'm following the OP's argument, and I'm probably missing something important, but it sounds kinda like he's arguing that:

Naw it's not that.

 

[timtofly]

These are your options:

- I believe that there is an invisible mouse
- I do not believe that there is in invisible mouse
- I believe that there isn't an invisible mouse

The person who experienced the mouse in every way, but sight; has a fourth option:

- I know that there is an invisible mouse.

One could still accept, reject, believe, or disbelieve that person's experiences.