I am concerned that I may have inadvertently committed a False Dilemma fallacy when I concluded that the existence of God is improbable. No, I am not saying that the conclusion that I reached is wrong --- it could very well be correct. I am just saying that the means by which I reached the conclusion may be flawed, and that therefore I may have to re-evaluate things while avoiding this fallacy.
How might I have committed the False Dilemma fallacy? I calculated that the existence of God is improbable because I was only considering two possibilities (1) a universe with a somewhat anthropomorphic God or (2) a completely Godless universe.
However, I may have not given adequate consideration to various traditions that hold to an existence of God without such anthropomorphisms - such as Deism and Pantheism.
Any input as I embark on re-examining the possibility of God's existence while keeping my mind open to the possibility of a non-anthropomorphic God?
How might I have committed the False Dilemma fallacy? I calculated that the existence of God is improbable because I was only considering two possibilities (1) a universe with a somewhat anthropomorphic God or (2) a completely Godless universe.
However, I may have not given adequate consideration to various traditions that hold to an existence of God without such anthropomorphisms - such as Deism and Pantheism.
Any input as I embark on re-examining the possibility of God's existence while keeping my mind open to the possibility of a non-anthropomorphic God?
