Non-existence

[Kyuuketsuki]

Do you assert that God exists because you have had personal, unverifiable, experience with him?

If you mean exclusively, then no. I believe I have two kinds of knowledge of God.

One is verifiable, rational propositional evidence that establishes the existence of God as highly probably, regardless of other kinds of knowledge. In other words, rational arguments for Gods existence.

These do not qualify as verifiable evidence because the same system of reasoning has been used to argue for other things that you do not believe in (would reject) and also the exact opposite ... it is therefore pointless!

But I also believe that belief in God wholly aside from the propositional evidence is warranted by properly basic belief.

Basic beliefs are another word for foundational beliefs. Basic beliefs are beliefs that are believed without being inferred from any other belief or evidence. But they are only properly basic if the belief is either self-evident or incorrigible for the person who holds them. "I think therefore I am" is an example of a basic belief, because it is not inferred from any other belief or evidence, and properly basic belief, because it is both incorrigible and self-evident to the person who holds it.

So because someone believes, for no apparent reason (absolute bullshit BTW), it counts as evidence ... that's just a variation on the fallacious argument from popularity.

That is essentially the same kind of belief, as the belief that you have or are a conscious mind, and is properly basic, though externally unverifiable because philosophical zombies are externally and empirically equivalent and no means of demonstration exist to distinguish a conscious person over a philosophical zombie. The belief that reality exists is properly basic, though internally unverifiable, because solipsism fits the same empirical data and with less complexity. The belief that God exists is properly basic, though externally unverifiable, because no means of demonstration exist to externally determine whether you have had a revelation from God, except an equivalent revelation from God.

No it's not because, whilst reality is an assumption, everything so far gleaned about it hangs together, makes sense, operates from consistent rules etc. etc. etc. everything about your god (and the thousands upon thousands of others) doesn't have any real logic or consistency to it at all.

Kyu

---

1. If p-zeds are really behaviorally indistingusible then so is their brain activity, they are behaviorally indistinguisble in every way, so they must have consciousness too, so they're not p-zeds, and therefore they can't actually exist.

To conclude this, you must first prove the hidden (and unverifiable) premise: that brain activity causally necessitates consciousness in a brain whose proposed consciousness is outside of your empirical observational ability and conscious experience.

Brain activity is directly related to physical brain function as demonstrated by thousands of medical conditions/damage scenarios ... when physical brain activity is affected (through damage or positive change ... brain function (mind) changes as well.

There is absolutely no evidence supporting the idea that mind is in some way separate from body/brain.

Kyu