(March 21, 2015 at 3:57 pm)pocaracas Wrote:(March 21, 2015 at 3:02 pm)Delicate Wrote: It doesn't worry you, the ad hoc nature of your explanations?
Doesn't it worry you that there are more than one religion?
That there is more than one belief?
That there is more than one deity in recorded history?
If any one deity is real, how would it allow others? why?
If it made itself known to some people, why wouldn't it make itself known to other people? Why would it rely on the faulty human transmission method? Why would it allow that method to incubate the astonishing diversity of beliefs we know of, today?
My explanations are based on human psychology, politics, power hunger, population control...
Any theist explanation is based on woo and hearsay.
Considering we have no access to the actual origin of the woo, we have to rely on some sort of probabilities...
Which strikes you as more reliable? woo or psychology?
I'm not worried by religious pluralism or pluralism of any sort. To me it's the same as aesthetic and musical diversity. Linguistic diversity and other forms of cultural diversity.
But I don't think you can avoid the ad hocness of your explanations by asking me a different question. Your explanations are ad hoc, and this weakness of theirs remains, right?
