RE: The worth of Knowledge
June 12, 2011 at 2:33 pm
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2011 at 2:34 pm by BloodyHeretic.)
(June 12, 2011 at 6:25 am)diffidus Wrote:(June 11, 2011 at 8:28 am)SleepingDemon Wrote: Goddammit, again???? Diffidus will you just change your religious views to theist and get it over with? This is becoming abbhorently banal. You have yet to prove why a space god with superpowers is more likely to exist than a unicorn so until you do that, your argument is bunk.
I was reading an interesting account about how the Human mind works with regard to belief. It goes something like this: when a person sees a fact or an argument that agrees with their belief, it is immediately taken on board without hardly any critical examination. When a person sees a fact or argument that goes against their belief, it induces a state of anger. It is difficult to challenge one's own beliefs, but alarm bells are raised within me if I find I am becoming angry over anothers point of view. It maybe that they have a real point. I sense anger in your response.
I will try to answer your question as best I can.
I think that with regard to the various ideas that you suggest, such as unicorns and the like, there is an error of classification. While the following is not wholly comprehensive, it does provide a certain coverage:
Class 1: Claims related to the existence of little red riding hood, peter pan etc. These can be dismissed on the basis that nobody is claiming that they exist, in fact, the authors of the fairy tales freely admitted that they were pure inventions of their imagination.
Class 2: Unicorns, the Greek God Pan etc. These concepts have become mythology. It is in the nature of a myth that they do not exist and that nobody now claims they do.
Class 3: Loch Ness Monster, Yeti etc. These are claimed to exist by some people and even now there are regular sitings. For these we should keep an open mind, but the probability of their existence is very low. We can assert this probability due to measurement. These creatures are not undetectable, in principle, using current technology. For example, Loch Ness has undergone search using submersibles and sonic radar. No sign of Nessy has been found. This does not rule out his existence, but we know from the area of the Loch and the claimed size of the monster, that the chances of it being outside the search zone is small.
Class 4: Gods existence, the human soul etc. Claims related to these, such as 'God exists' are still widely held by people. Evidence is presented by people in the form of personal accounts. But the really important point, is that it is not possible, at present, to estimate the probability of the claim being true or not, due to the inherent nature of the thing under consideration. It could well be that, as Humankind's knowledege progresses, we may be able to settle these issues, but at present we cannot.
Your class division appears to be primarily based on how popular a belief is. God's existence and the human soul have no more good evidence than unicorns, they're just more popular. You don't make a very good argument.
"It is in the nature of a myth that they do not exist and that nobody now claims they do."
Just substitute religious beliefs for myths in that sentence, and you have it.
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
Einstein
When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down happy. They told me I didn't understand the assignment. I told them they didn't understand life.
- John Lennon