[Serious] Time to embrace Islam!

[LadyForCamus]

@AtlasS33

There is no way this guy is Mystic Knight. He hasn’t said anything about perceiving the truth of the good of the all perfect love and oneness of perception of the light. 😝

[maxolla]

I guess I haven’t considered reasonable belief as a category apart from certainty.  I think the point is that belief is chosen and not necessarily based on complete evidence.

I would argue the opposite is true. Belief is (or should be) borne of one’s confidence level in the truth of a proposition. If there is substantial evidence in support of a particular truth claim, then my confidence level in that truth claim will be high, and belief is generated. I cannot choose to believe in god any more than you can choose to believe in Santa Clause.

I think we agree. Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered. What an individual considers sufficient evidence is where we start to differ. We both could agree that what we call wind exists. We can feel the effects of it but we can’t see it. There is some evidence missing regarding wind (sight). We still choose to believe it exists because we can see the effects of the wind and feel it. Your belief in science and mine in creation are similar. There is evidence for both but the argument always goes to what evidence is.

[WinterHold]

@AtlasS33

There is no way this guy is Mystic Knight. He hasn’t said anything about perceiving the truth of the good of the all perfect love and oneness of perception of the light. 😝

Just give him time; first he'll convert from Sunni Islam to Shiite Islam -and tell you about it-, then he'll convert to twelver-Shiite Islam -and tell you about it-, then he'll convert to deism -and tell you about it-, then back again to twelver Shiite Islam -and tell you about it-.

The common theme is walls of text.

[LastPoet]

I would argue the opposite is true. Belief is (or should be) borne of one’s confidence level in the truth of a proposition. If there is substantial evidence in support of a particular truth claim, then my confidence level in that truth claim will be high, and belief is generated. I cannot choose to believe in god any more than you can choose to believe in Santa Clause.

I think we agree.  Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.  What an individual considers sufficient evidence is where we start to differ.  We both could agree that what we call wind exists.  We can feel the effects of it but we can’t see it.  There is some evidence missing regarding wind (sight).  We still choose to believe it exists because we can see the effects of the wind and feel it.  Your belief in science and mine in creation are similar.  There is evidence for both but the argument always goes to what evidence is.

So to take your analogy, what method can we use to find your wind. What can we do and replicate to further generations, ya know, to avoid my children to be so blind of god. Please. If someone said there was wind and we could not detect, impossible to know, likes to hide from those that can detect it, i go for the standard and call Bullsit.

[Simon Moon]

I would argue the opposite is true. Belief is (or should be) borne of one’s confidence level in the truth of a proposition. If there is substantial evidence in support of a particular truth claim, then my confidence level in that truth claim will be high, and belief is generated. I cannot choose to believe in god any more than you can choose to believe in Santa Clause.

I think we agree.  Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.  What an individual considers sufficient evidence is where we start to differ.  We both could agree that what we call wind exists.  We can feel the effects of it but we can’t see it.  There is some evidence missing regarding wind (sight).  We still choose to believe it exists because we can see the effects of the wind and feel it.  Your belief in science and mine in creation are similar.  There is evidence for both but the argument always goes to what evidence is.

Beliefs are not a choice, they are a result of being convinced. Belief is acquired through being convinced of a proposition.

Not matter how hard I try to chose to belief that I am able to fly, I am unable to believe.

There is no evidence missing for the existence of wind. Wind itself may not be visible, but the effects of it certainly are visible. I do not chose to believe wind exists, I am convinced it exists based on massive evidence. I can not chose to believe wind does not exist.

If one says they make the choice of believing a proposition, it is my contention that, either they misunderstand the process of belief, or they are fooling themselves into thinking they believe.

Belief is defined by cognitive scientists and philosophers of mind as; the psychological state in which one is convinced that a premise or proposition is true, or likely true.

HOw can I chose to be convinced? Either i am convinced, or I am not.

[maxolla]

I think we agree.  Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.  What an individual considers sufficient evidence is where we start to differ.  We both could agree that what we call wind exists.  We can feel the effects of it but we can’t see it.  There is some evidence missing regarding wind (sight).  We still choose to believe it exists because we can see the effects of the wind and feel it.  Your belief in science and mine in creation are similar.  There is evidence for both but the argument always goes to what evidence is.

Beliefs are not a choice, they are a result of being convinced. Belief is acquired through being convinced of a proposition.

Not matter how hard I try to chose to belief that I am able to fly, I am unable to believe.

There is no evidence missing for the existence of wind. Wind itself may not be visible, but the effects of it certainly are visible. I do not chose to believe wind exists, I am convinced it exists based on massive evidence. I can not chose to believe wind does not exist.

If one says they make the choice of believing a proposition, it is my contention that, either they misunderstand the process of belief, or they are fooling themselves into thinking they believe.

Belief is defined by cognitive scientists and philosophers of mind as; the psychological state in which one is convinced that a premise or proposition is true, or likely true.

HOw can I chose to be convinced? Either i am convinced, or I am not.

" Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.” Belief and disbelief are two options when proposed with a premise. We as people choose which premises are true based on the evidence. Someone makes a positive statement of what is fact I have a choice to believe it or not to believe it (belief or disbelief). Again I contend, we choose our beliefs.

[Simon Moon]

Beliefs are not a choice, they are a result of being convinced. Belief is acquired through being convinced of a proposition.

Not matter how hard I try to chose to belief that I am able to fly, I am unable to believe.

There is no evidence missing for the existence of wind. Wind itself may not be visible, but the effects of it certainly are visible. I do not chose to believe wind exists, I am convinced it exists based on massive evidence. I can not chose to believe wind does not exist.

If one says they make the choice of believing a proposition, it is my contention that, either they misunderstand the process of belief, or they are fooling themselves into thinking they believe.

Belief is defined by cognitive scientists and philosophers of mind as; the psychological state in which one is convinced that a premise or proposition is true, or likely true.

HOw can I chose to be convinced? Either i am convinced, or I am not.

" Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.”  Belief and disbelief are two options when proposed with a premise.  We as people choose which premises are true based on the evidence.  Someone makes a positive statement of what is fact I have a choice to believe it or not to believe it (belief or disbelief).  Again I contend, we choose our beliefs.

I do not think you are choosing to believe. I think what you are describing, is choosing what types of evidence will convince you to believe.

Once you decide one what you consider good standards of evidence that will convince you, then you believe.

[maxolla]

" Belief is chosen through faith in experiences, knowledge, and evidence gathered.”  Belief and disbelief are two options when proposed with a premise.  We as people choose which premises are true based on the evidence.  Someone makes a positive statement of what is fact I have a choice to believe it or not to believe it (belief or disbelief).  Again I contend, we choose our beliefs.

I do not think you are choosing to believe. I think what you are describing, is choosing what types of evidence will convince you to believe.

Once you decide one what you consider good standards of evidence that will convince you, then you believe.

Ah yes. Choosing the evidence that seems logical and relevant while discarding the false evidence. The criteria which the evidence is chosen is much more complex than I think we give credit.

[Succubus]

I do not think you are choosing to believe. I think what you are describing, is choosing what types of evidence will convince you to believe.

Once you decide one what you consider good standards of evidence that will convince you, then you believe.

Ah yes.  Choosing the evidence that seems logical and relevant while discarding the false evidence.  The criteria which the evidence is chosen is much more complex than I think we give credit.

You have it exactly arse backwards. What you're doing is, starting with the conclusion then looking for evidence to support that conclusion. You should start with the evidence then form conclusions.

Classic pseudo scientific approach.

[maxolla]

Ah yes.  Choosing the evidence that seems logical and relevant while discarding the false evidence.  The criteria which the evidence is chosen is much more complex than I think we give credit.

You have it exactly arse backwards. What you're doing is, starting with the conclusion then looking for evidence to support that conclusion. You should start with the evidence then form conclusions.

Classic pseudo scientific approach.

So your saying I have a classical approach? Nice!