(August 11, 2016 at 9:46 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:(August 11, 2016 at 9:37 am)SteveII Wrote: Why do I have to have a cutoff? How many apples do we have to drop to examine the properties of gravity? The fact that the same thing happens over and over (with different people over 2000 years) with reliability and predictability is empirical evidence of a cause and effect relationship. The individual ascribes the effect to salvation and God. Therefore, unless you are willing to throw out human intuition as a source of knowledge, you are left with proof of the existence of God.
Lol, sure, people reliably and predictably SAY they have a personal relationship with God without an OUNCE of measurable, demonstrable evidence to back that claim up. This is in no way empirical, and it is in no way proof of cause and effect. I think you need to read up on the basic principles of scientific research and the difference between 'correlation' and 'cause'. If you are claiming proof of cause and effect here, you better be able to back that up with a double-blind, controlled, clinical trial or two involving your god. An individual ascribing the effect to 'salvation and God' when they ALREADY believed that to begin with is blatant confirmation bias, and not scientific in any way.
em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
This discussion is not scientific. You can't put a persons brain under a microscope and examine experiences and why they do or say things. So, 'scientific' standards of proof do not apply.
Are you willing to throw out human intuition as a source of knowledge? It seems so. How do you justify that?
