(December 20, 2017 at 1:09 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(December 20, 2017 at 12:35 pm)SteveII Wrote: Well, it is your opinion that many or all of my list of reasons are unconvincing to you. None can be shown to be false (or even more likely to be false) so they are all rational beliefs. If one surveys a series of rational reasons for belief that, in their opinion, range from makes-sense to more-likely-than-not to compelling, then one has a cumulative case that increases the probability of their belief (in this case, belief in God).
For example, say I tell my daughter than an old army buddy is coming this afternoon for a visit (she has a belief). If a man strange man walks up the drive after lunch, is there more reasons to believe my statement? What about if the man looked to be about my age? What if he had on an army jacket or hat? What if he had all those things and flowers (for my wife)? The original belief can be strengthened by more facts that are not themselves conclusive but fit the framework. Cumulative.
Bold mine.
That is not how beliefs are deemed to be rational. Beliefs are determined to be rational if they are supported by demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid/sound logic.
Not if they can't be shown to be false.
If that is your method you use in order to believe your beliefs are rational, then I can list an endless amount of claims that can not be proven to be false, that I am sure you don't believe.
I can show that anything on my list is "supported by demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument, and/[OR] valid/sound logic" -- according to an appropriate application of kind/threshold of proof mentioned in my post just above.
