No reason justifies disbelief.

[LadyForCamus]

That was not the question, the question was what information have you been able to gather using the non scientific method so far ?

That's taking me off topic. I'm not inclined to go there.

---

they have to be demonstrated.

By which you mean: demonstrated through intersubjective empirical data. Which means, science.

That’s not off topic at all! It’s completely on topic. What knowledge have you gained using this non-scientific method? The one you say the rest of us are so closed minded against.

Second question:

Why can’t empirical investigation detect a god? What distinctive qualities of god render him undetectable? Perhaps you’re the closed-minded one to assume empirical investigation could never gather any information about god. That sounds like a metaphysical commitment on your part.

[bennyboy]

That's taking me off topic. I'm not inclined to go there.

---

By which you mean: demonstrated through intersubjective empirical data. Which means, science.

That’s not off topic at all! It’s completely on topic. What knowledge have you gained using this non-scientific method? The one you say the rest of us are so closed minded against.

Second question:

Why can’t empirical investigation detect a god?  What distinctive qualities of god render him undetectable?  Perhaps you’re the closed-minded one to assume empirical investigation could never gather any information about god.  That sounds like a metaphysical commitment on your part.

Is this an issue of detection, or an issue of gnostic detection? If God is real, then it may be that literally everything you measure or observe has God written on it. In this case, God is so ubiquitous that the God idea fails to differentiate anything from anything else. And that's what detection is-- noticing things that stand out of the background of space in some way.

To put this in material terms-- can we detect the Universe?

[LadyForCamus]

That’s not off topic at all! It’s completely on topic. What knowledge have you gained using this non-scientific method? The one you say the rest of us are so closed minded against.

Second question:

Why can’t empirical investigation detect a god?  What distinctive qualities of god render him undetectable?  Perhaps you’re the closed-minded one to assume empirical investigation could never gather any information about god.  That sounds like a metaphysical commitment on your part.

Can we detect anything which isn't either an entity or a process of entities contained in this universe?

How do you know that god isn’t an entity?

[Belacqua]

That’s not off topic at all! It’s completely on topic. What knowledge have you gained using this non-scientific method?

I've never said that I have gained non-scientific knowledge. I'm not sure it's even possible.

I've been talking about reliability, as it applies to the sources of knowledge, and what people think of when they use that term. 

You'll say I'm avoiding the question, but it's unrelated to the thing I'm talking about.

Second question:

Why can’t empirical investigation detect a god?  What distinctive qualities of god render him undetectable?  Perhaps you’re the closed-minded one to assume empirical investigation could never gather any information about god.  That sounds like a metaphysical commitment on your part.

I've covered this before too. Strange that I have to type everything over and over.

If you define God as some sort of entity, like Bigfoot, then he would be detectable by science.

That is not the way the classical theologians have defined him, since Plato, Aristotle, Gregory Chrystosum, etc. etc. etc. By definition God is not one object added to the number of all the other objects. God and the universe do not make two. God is idea. God is non-material, therefore not measurable or quantifiable. 

The fact that you have to ask, that you haven't heard all this a million times before, means that you really don't know enough about theology to have an opinion on the subject.

It is a metaphysical commitment on the part of the people who believe this way. Of course. I never said having a metaphysical commitment is bad; we all have them.

[ohreally]

That’s not off topic at all! It’s completely on topic. What knowledge have you gained using this non-scientific method? The one you say the rest of us are so closed minded against.

Second question:

Why can’t empirical investigation detect a god?  What distinctive qualities of god render him undetectable?  Perhaps you’re the closed-minded one to assume empirical investigation could never gather any information about god.  That sounds like a metaphysical commitment on your part.

Is this an issue of detection, or an issue of gnostic detection?  If God is real, then it may be that literally everything you measure or observe has God written on it.  In this case, God is so ubiquitous that the God idea fails to differentiate anything from anything else.  And that's what detection is-- noticing things that stand out of the background of space in some way.

What is something that is part of everything, that we can't detect at all?    And how would we know about it.

[tackattack]

Here’s a simple tool that is reliable, posits measurable results and is completely subjective and non empirical: I’ve used johari’s window construct for years to measure my progress socially. Why not banter about that folks.

[bennyboy]

Is this an issue of detection, or an issue of gnostic detection?  If God is real, then it may be that literally everything you measure or observe has God written on it.  In this case, God is so ubiquitous that the God idea fails to differentiate anything from anything else.  And that's what detection is-- noticing things that stand out of the background of space in some way.

What is something that is part of everything, that we can't detect at all?    And how would we know about it.

What are quarks made of?

---

Can we detect anything which isn't either an entity or a process of entities contained in this universe?

How do you know that god isn’t an entity?

I don't know that, but most definitions of god do not include being contained in any way, let alone in the universe. But let me ask you this-- if you detect anything at all, how do you know you aren't detecting a part of god? In a pantheistic world view, that would be the case.

[ohreally]

What is something that is part of everything, that we can't detect at all?    And how would we know about it.

What are quarks made of?

---

How do you know that god isn’t an entity?

I don't know that, but most definitions of god do not include being contained in any way, let alone in the universe.  But let me ask you this-- if you detect anything at all, how do you know you aren't detecting a part of god?

How do you know what a quark is?  How do we detect it if it's part of everything?

[LadyForCamus]

What is something that is part of everything, that we can't detect at all?    And how would we know about it.

What are quarks made of?

---

How do you know that god isn’t an entity?

I don't know that, but most definitions of god do not include being contained in any way, let alone in the universe.  But let me ask you this-- if you detect anything at all, how do you know you aren't detecting a part of god?  In a pantheistic world view, that would be the case.

Why would I know if I was or wasn’t?  Not trolling. I mean that question sincerely.

[Deesse23]

I've never said that I have gained non-scientific knowledge. I'm not sure it's even possible.

I know someone who disagrees with you:

For the second time, we only know things through thinking -- memory, interpretation, plugging new data into existing theories.

Maybe you just need to think......harder i mean, in order to gain some knowledge (about god even!). This way you could prove your above statement ("I'm not sure it's even possible") to be correct. All you need to do is think. Come on, harder!

I am also noting that you cannot help but strawman everybody all the time when they say "so far we havent...." by telling them what they really mean is "we never will/can..". Your intellectual dishonesty of telling everybody what they really mean is noted (again) too. Ever considered joining a circus as a mind reader?