Dawkins spectrum of probabilities

lostexpectation · Post by **lostexpectation** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:29 pm

category 7 is perfectly valid answer

adamd164 · Post by **adamd164** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:52 pm

fintanruth wrote:Collins dictionary

God:- (Theo) the sole Supreme Being, eternal, spiritual, and transcendent, who is the Creator and ruler of all and is infinite in all attributes; the object of worship in monotheistic religions.

god :-a supernatural being, who is worshipped as the controller of some part of the universe or some aspect of life in the world or is the personification of some force

Two seperate words.

Yahweh :- Old Testament a vocalization of the Tetragrammaton, used esp. by Christian theologians
from Hebrew, from YHVH, with conjectural vowels; perhaps related to hawah to be; see also Jehovah

Jehovah :- the personal name of God, revealed to Moses on Mount Horeb (Exodus 3)

I believe the word God is always used out of context. When using the word God we need to specify which of the gods we refer to.

I don’t think it was a good idea for Dawkins to draw up this spectrum of probabilities 1 to 7. The term God means different things to different people.

It is my belief you are either an Atheist or not.

Fintan

www.therealmoses.com

Why start a thread asking people to place themselves on the spectrum if you think that it's a bad idea?

I'm genuinely curious.

While you're at it, please point out to me in which post I capitalised the 'g' in the word god.

That's if you're not too busy deciding which of us can be in your little faith gang and which can't.

adamd164 · Post by **adamd164** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:54 pm

lostexpectation wrote:category 7 is perfectly valid answer

Care to expand on why you think this to be so?

If people want to have faith then fair enough, good luck to them. But don't for a minute suggest that it's scientifically accurate. Perhaps that's not the sense in which you meant it, that's why I'm asking.

mkaobrih · Post by **mkaobrih** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:40 am

ravenflag wrote:Just because we cannot disprove a myth does not mean it could be true.
Nobody here belives that there is a possiblity of a tooth fairy,santa claus or a easter bunny so why give religion the privilege?

I am certain there is no tooth fairy so i dont belive it.
I am certain there is no santa so i dont belive him.

Now im off to feed my pink unicorn.

I'm with ravenflag on this one - you could get all philosophical and Meta-physical on what you can and can’t know but that’s just brain games and totally irrelevant.
I'm 7 all the way!!.

mkaobrih · Post by **mkaobrih** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:50 am

If people want to have faith then fair enough, good luck to them. But don't for a minute suggest that it's scientifically accurate. Perhaps that's not the sense in which you meant it, that's why I'm asking.

I’m not a scientist per-say; just an ex-mathematician and you can make a mathematical argument for god via Godels incompleteness theorems BUT IT’S JUST MATHS and has no bearing on reality. So why do scientist think that every single thing in the universe can be explained by science. Science is not facts - just observation’s. So I will continue to be untroubled by the lack of scientific evidence for the non-existence of god.

Marcas · Post by **Marcas** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:30 am

I'm category 7 -or at least 6.99999999999r
Its so obvious religion was made up by men.

fintanruth · Post by **fintanruth** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:06 am

Hi adamd164

In answer to your questions.

Moreover, I resent your attempts to hijack the term and dictate its usage.

What term did I hijack?

Why start a thread asking people to place themselves on the spectrum if you think that it's a bad idea? I'm genuinely curious.

I started the thread to see how other atheists felt about Dawkins spectrum of probabilities. I myself have no problem saying I’m a 7.
On the lower end of the scale people can have all sorts of doubts because of the nature of religion, in most cases they follow the leader, but on the higher end of the scale one has to decide what you actually believe yourself. An atheist is a person that believes there is no God; I believe that the God of Moses “Yahweh” never existed.

While you're at it, please point out to me in which post I capitalized the 'g' in the word god.

Did I say you did?

That's if you're not too busy deciding which of us can be in your little faith gang and which can't.

Will all the members of my faith gang please stand up so that I can count you?

Fintan

www.therealmoses.com

adamd164 · Post by **adamd164** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:44 am

mkaobrih wrote:
If people want to have faith then fair enough, good luck to them. But don't for a minute suggest that it's scientifically accurate. Perhaps that's not the sense in which you meant it, that's why I'm asking.
I’m not a scientist per-say; just an ex-mathematician and you can make a mathematical argument for god via Godels incompleteness theorems BUT IT’S JUST MATHS and has no bearing on reality. So why do scientist think that every single thing in the universe can be explained by science. Science is not facts - just observation’s. So I will continue to be untroubled by the lack of scientific evidence for the non-existence of god.

If something (anything) cannot be proven, then it cannot be known with certainty. That is the very foundation of science. I don't think for a second that anyone will ever "prove" or "disprove" god's existence. I am an atheist because I believe that there is no god (based on the breathtaking lack of evidence for the hypothesis) and not because I know it.

adamd164 · Post by **adamd164** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:47 am

fintanruth wrote:Hi adamd164

In answer to your questions.

Moreover, I resent your attempts to hijack the term and dictate its usage.

What term did I hijack?

Why start a thread asking people to place themselves on the spectrum if you think that it's a bad idea? I'm genuinely curious.

I started the thread to see how other atheists felt about Dawkins spectrum of probabilities. I myself have no problem saying I’m a 7.
On the lower end of the scale people can have all sorts of doubts because of the nature of religion, in most cases they follow the leader, but on the higher end of the scale one has to decide what you actually believe yourself. An atheist is a person that believes there is no God; I believe that the God of Moses “Yahweh” never existed.

While you're at it, please point out to me in which post I capitalized the 'g' in the word god.

Did I say you did?

That's if you're not too busy deciding which of us can be in your little faith gang and which can't.

Will all the members of my faith gang please stand up so that I can count you?

Fintan

www.therealmoses.com

tbh Fintan, I couldn't give a damn about your investigations into the veracity of Biblical literature or mythology. I'm well aware that it's a pile of crap.

My stance, which certainly won't change, is that if any entity or phenomenon is not disprovable by the scientific method, then one cannot say with certainty that it does or does not exist. One relies on probabilities and indirect evidence to make an informed guess or supposition.

If one claims to have knowledge which they cannot possibly have (i.e. that a supernatural being certainly does not exist), then they are resting upon faith, and faith alone.

mkaobrih · Post by **mkaobrih** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:07 am

adamd164 wrote: If something (anything) cannot be proven, then it cannot be known with certainty. That is the very foundation of science. I don't think for a second that anyone will ever "prove" or "disprove" god's existence. I am an atheist because I believe that there is no god (based on the breathtaking lack of evidence for the hypothesis) and not because I know it.

Nope – maths is about proofs. There are no proofs in science just observed events and theory’s to explain these events. Theories, which can be amended if they need be. You cannot live your life expecting to have things proven to you before you can fully accept or dismiss them.