I posted on the religion/spirituality board with a post "Why i'm a naturalist"...
It was pretty stock standard stuff, reasonable non-belief mostly, I listed some ideas about what makes reasons for a belief good reasons and gave some examples such as:
We start with a belief given the evidence we have available somewhere along a scale from 0% chance of truth to 100% chance of truth, as we examine evidence we are able to slide up and down this scale, for instance if we start with an experience of a god who is specifically the Christian god we can place our belief at 80% or so, given that sensory experience is usually reliable, then we look at other beliefs based on that same standard of evidence and see that there are other ontradictory beliefs arrived at through the same standard of evidence, if we started at 80% and found out that another belief in Allah is contradictory we now have a 40% probability (.8*.5) of that belief being true, if we find another belief in Krishna we now have 1/3rd of the initial probability, (.8*.333) 26.44% chance of our belief being true given the evidence, we then discover that a belief in another god was reached through this experiential standard we now have a (.8*.25) 20% chance, another 10 contradictory beliefs and we have a .8% chance of our beliefs being true given the evidence, another 100 contradictory beliefs based on experience and we have a 0.008% chance of our beliefs being true given experiential evidence, eventually the chances of our belief being true given that there are literally thousands of contradictory beliefs based on this standard of evidence becomes so minuscule that you must reasonably conclude that the belief is almost certainly false, the only way to raise the probability now would be to find evidence that confirms our belief but dis-confirms (or is neutral towards) other contradictory beliefs - Seeing as no such evidence exists we should conclude that the chances of any of us being correct is near zero and thus the non-existence of God based on experiential evidence is near certain.
I didn't even get one response before I was banned, the reason was something like "being hostile"....
It was pretty stock standard stuff, reasonable non-belief mostly, I listed some ideas about what makes reasons for a belief good reasons and gave some examples such as:
We start with a belief given the evidence we have available somewhere along a scale from 0% chance of truth to 100% chance of truth, as we examine evidence we are able to slide up and down this scale, for instance if we start with an experience of a god who is specifically the Christian god we can place our belief at 80% or so, given that sensory experience is usually reliable, then we look at other beliefs based on that same standard of evidence and see that there are other ontradictory beliefs arrived at through the same standard of evidence, if we started at 80% and found out that another belief in Allah is contradictory we now have a 40% probability (.8*.5) of that belief being true, if we find another belief in Krishna we now have 1/3rd of the initial probability, (.8*.333) 26.44% chance of our belief being true given the evidence, we then discover that a belief in another god was reached through this experiential standard we now have a (.8*.25) 20% chance, another 10 contradictory beliefs and we have a .8% chance of our beliefs being true given the evidence, another 100 contradictory beliefs based on experience and we have a 0.008% chance of our beliefs being true given experiential evidence, eventually the chances of our belief being true given that there are literally thousands of contradictory beliefs based on this standard of evidence becomes so minuscule that you must reasonably conclude that the belief is almost certainly false, the only way to raise the probability now would be to find evidence that confirms our belief but dis-confirms (or is neutral towards) other contradictory beliefs - Seeing as no such evidence exists we should conclude that the chances of any of us being correct is near zero and thus the non-existence of God based on experiential evidence is near certain.
I didn't even get one response before I was banned, the reason was something like "being hostile"....
.
