A question for Athiests. (page 8)

Paris

shirley - careful , i think you like her too much, may be you are really Viviane ?

AndDontCallMeShirley

I'm assuming that's an attempt at humor, VG?

Exactly. A key component of a hypothesis is attempting to explain something. What is that something? What is the observation you are attempting to explain? What measurement? What phonomenon? What, specifically, is the "something" that needs explanation? Also, that isn't even a scientific definition you've provided, proofs only exist in math. Testing is also mentioned. How would you test your speculation? What are the consequenses if your idea is correct?

You've not got a hypothesis, but speculation.

You are wrong, because you exclude that a hypothesis can be also a speculation. For instance:

A different meaning of the term hypothesis is used in formal logic, to denote the antecedent of a proposition; thus in the proposition "If P, then Q", P denotes the hypothesis (or antecedent); Q can be called a consequent. P is the assumption in a (possibly counterfactual) what if question.

According to the above definition, I repeat what I said:

My hypothesis is that God exists, but he decided not to interfere in our life.

So we have if P => Q, where P is the hypothesis (God exists) and Q is the consequent (he does not interfere in our life).

opusdei1972

Viviane I want to show you that the hypothesis "God exists" needs not to be TRUE so as to get a True implication, if the consequent were TRUE. We know that God does not interfere in our life, this can be proven by observation. So it does not matter if God exists in order to get my implication true, because we know that the consequent is true. See the table bellow:

$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline A & B & A \Rightarrow B \\ \hline V & V & V \\ V & F & F \\ F & V & V \\ F & F & V \\ \hline \end{array}$

talesin

To the OP

Like your thoughts ........ I've never believed in a G*d, so have always been an atheist. For me, part of that way of being, means I have an open mind.

Do we have a consciousness that will continue as energy? I dunno, but I'm open to the possibility. Or maybe not even a consciousness - maybe there ARE alternate universes, and we merely end life in *this* one, while we continue on in another.

That is the beauty of non-belief - the possibilities are limitless, and science has yet to explain a lot ........ so keep wondering, be open to the universe's potential, and most of all, I would say...........

BE your own self, enjoy life, and let others choose their OWN path. Who cares? If people need to believe in a G*d, let them ... maybe it is their 'coping mechanism' for life. *shrugs*

xo

tal

Viviane

You are wrong, because you exclude that a hypothesis can be also a speculation. For instance:

According to the above definition, I repeat what I said:

So we have if P => Q, where P is the hypothesis (God exists) and Q is the consequent (he does not interfere in our life).

Of course I'm not. You have no consequent, no proposition. You spent a lot of time researching that only to forget the "then" part. What you have is "I speculate this undetected creature could have this property". It's just antecedant with nothing else. It's still not a hypethesis, it's just speculation.

talesin

Paris

You are correct. Many times, I have seen other ppl on this site, who are atheists, say that education will 'cure' a belief in G*d. Anyone who says that, is being intellectually dishonest (ie, they are LIARS).

Though I don't understand it, I know that many highly educated people are believers. It's all nonsense to me (religion, and belief in a deity), but I understand that some folks feel a need for a higher power, and accept their way of dealing with life. Arguing with those people who are hell-bent on destroying others' belief systems, instead of letting them be, is a waste of time.

xo

tal

Viviane

Viviane I want to show you that the hypothesis "God exists" needs not to be TRUE so as to get a True implication, if the consequent were TRUE. We know that God does not interfere in our life, this can be proven by observation. So it does not matter if God exists in order to get my implication true, because we know that the consequent is true. See the table bellow:

I said nothing about the truth of your speculation, simple that you don't have a hypothesis. I'm not sure what showing a logical implication table. It doesn't help that you don't have a hypothesis.

Also, again, proof is for math, not for speculating on God. It absolutely cannot be proven that God doesn't interfere in our life. Even if you DID have a working hypothesis or had constructed a valid logical implication table, that alone would defy even the possibility of falsifiability.

So, still just speculation.

Viviane

You are correct. Many times, I have seen other ppl on this site, who are atheists, say that education will 'cure' a belief in G*d. Anyone who says that, is being intellectually dishonest (ie, they are LIARS).

Can you cite a specific example?

Oubliette

Viviane: Can you cite a specific example?

Wow, I'm beginning to think that you are me!!!

A question for Athiests.

Share this