Posts: 8214
Threads: 394
Joined: November 2, 2011
Reputation:
44
Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 25, 2015 at 11:51 pm
A lot of people argue on the lines of the following:
1. If there were proofs of a God, then everyone would believe in God.
2. Some people don't believe in God.
3. Therefore there aren't any proofs of God.
A lot of people argue similarly on the lines of the following (which is similar but not exactly the same):
1. If people were presented with proofs of God, they would believe in God.
2. Some don't believe in God.
3. Therefore they weren't presented with proofs of God.
I would say for these two arguments to be true. The following would have to be true as well. That for example, Sunnis would accept proofs that point to Shiism if they are conclusive, clear and decisive. However I believe such proofs exist. However people turn away from it. Even when a lot of people are presented evidence they turn away from it.
The human phenomenon as far as accepting truth goes, it seems, that we haven't over all reached a mass status where almost everyone is sincere towards the truth that if they were proven something they would believe.
One day we may get there - but till then - this sort of reasoning that people accept positive claims when it's proven to them seems rather naive of the situation humanity is in.
To be honest, I'm not sure how people cannot see what they are and the signs of God in themselves, aside from not reflecting. But when people reflect, it should be obvious.
A lot of people here have reflected I believe - but - there is something else preventing them from believing. They see but then take their disbelief as proof of their blindness towards the light of God, to the extent they have become blind towards it despite it's clear indications and reminder.
Posts: 5983
Threads: 249
Joined: January 2, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:28 am
(December 25, 2015 at 11:51 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: A lot of people argue on the lines of the following:
1. If there were proofs of a God, then everyone would believe in God.
2. Some people don't believe in God.
3. Therefore there aren't any proofs of God.
A lot of people argue similarly on the lines of the following (which is similar but not exactly the same):
1. If people were presented with proofs of God, they would believe in God.
2. Some don't believe in God.
3. Therefore they weren't presented with proofs of God.
I would say for these two arguments to be true. The following would have to be true as well. That for example, Sunnis would accept proofs that point to Shiism if they are conclusive, clear and decisive. However I believe such proofs exist. However people turn away from it. Even when a lot of people are presented evidence they turn away from it.
The human phenomenon as far as accepting truth goes, it seems, that we haven't over all reached a mass status where almost everyone is sincere towards the truth that if they were proven something they would believe.
One day we may get there - but till then - this sort of reasoning that people accept positive claims when it's proven to them seems rather naive of the situation humanity is in.
To be honest, I'm not sure how people cannot see what they are and the signs of God in themselves, aside from not reflecting. But when people reflect, it should be obvious.
A lot of people here have reflected I believe - but - there is something else preventing them from believing. They see but then take their disbelief as proof of their blindness towards the light of God, to the extent they have become blind towards it despite it's clear indications and reminder.
Proof doesn't necessarily equal belief because people don't always accept proof.
I don't accept anything you have said to be proof. You mainly babble about reflecting or something along the lines of "Obviously god would do exactly what my religion says god did."
You say things like obviously god would send down a messenger, give us a book to read, then you go off onto an emotional rant.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:39 am
My publisher sent me proofs the other day, and I rejected them because they had messed up several obvious things. So there's that...
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:45 am
(This post was last modified: December 26, 2015 at 12:45 am by Cyberman.)
Forget about "proofs"; think "evidence". Present some and we can evaluate it. Just don't go all butthurt and pissy if/when we tear it apart - that's what evidence is for.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:46 am
(December 26, 2015 at 12:39 am)Quantum Wrote: My publisher sent me proofs the other day, and I rejected them because they had messed up several obvious things. So there's that...
I once applied for a job as a poof-reader. I didn't get it.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 28330
Threads: 114
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:48 am
Mystic, you are blinded by your own opinion. That is a bad state from which to evaluate truths or proof. You think others are blind, but there is none so blind as cannot see the faults in their own view.
Posts: 30595
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 12:53 am
@OP:
No, they do not.
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 1:23 am
Quote:A lot of people here have reflected I believe - but - there is something else preventing them from believing.
Yeah.
Reality.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 1:35 am
Yes, reality. That inconvenient thing that doesn't go away when you close your eyes.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 66329
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Do humans always accept proofs when presented to them?
December 26, 2015 at 3:32 am
(This post was last modified: December 26, 2015 at 3:33 am by The Grand Nudger.)
(December 25, 2015 at 11:51 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: A lot of people argue on the lines of the following:
1. If there were proofs of a God, then everyone would believe in God.
2. Some people don't believe in God.
3. Therefore there aren't any proofs of God.
A lot of people argue similarly on the lines of the following (which is similar but not exactly the same):
1. If people were presented with proofs of God, they would believe in God.
2. Some don't believe in God.
3. Therefore they weren't presented with proofs of God.
I would say for these two arguments to be true. The following would have to be true as well. That for example, Sunnis would accept proofs that point to Shiism if they are conclusive, clear and decisive. However I believe such proofs exist. However people turn away from it. Even when a lot of people are presented evidence they turn away from it. Who, who argues this? You appear to be the only person expressing such sentiments.
Quote:The human phenomenon as far as accepting truth goes, it seems, that we haven't over all reached a mass status where almost everyone is sincere towards the truth that if they were proven something they would believe.
One day we may get there - but till then - this sort of reasoning that people accept positive claims when it's proven to them seems rather naive of the situation humanity is in.
We may be there now, but you, being married to your ideology, refuse to acknowledge this. You would be a prime example of the thing you criticize in others. You believe in supernatural locks ffs.....
Quote:To be honest, I'm not sure how people cannot see what they are and the signs of God in themselves, aside from not reflecting. But when people reflect, it should be obvious.
A lot of people here have reflected I believe - but - there is something else preventing them from believing. They see but then take their disbelief as proof of their blindness towards the light of God, to the extent they have become blind towards it despite it's clear indications and reminder.
What should be obvious? What? Yes, we know that you believe that something else™ " is preventing them from believing, a fairy curse..........you've told us.....this is why the irony is delicious. Go on, tell us more about how people cling to their absurd beliefs in the absence or even face of evidence and reason.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
|
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
