Your theory of justification?

[tackattack]

So would that be.. partially beasian with a fallibilism qualifier? I know you love labels and I was actually hoping for one.

With regard to your question:
I would say I believe in God because the available evidence (subjective and experiential) seems logically indicative and rational and this coupled with experiencing both the opposite position and this position, one is indicatively more pronounced in it's usefulness is more justified than the opposite position would be and the sum of it's alternate positions.

I think that's right.. you're catching me at the bottom of the fuel tank.. I'll think more on it tomorrow.

[reverendjeremiah]

That is to say that we have no good reason to have an anthropomorphic view of the cosmos therefore every anthropomorphic view of the cosmos is false... Is that right?

Of course not. I merely said it should be held up to the greatest srutiny. Thats a big difference from saying all anthropomorphic views of the cosmos are false.

What about contradictory materialist conclusions, such as MOND & Dark Matter? Something being materialist is by no means enough to be justified in believing it.

-Dark Mater = In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is matter that is inferred to exist from gravitational effects on visible matter and background radiation, but is undetectable by emitted or scattered electromagnetic radiation.

-MOND = In physics, Modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND) is a hypothesis that proposes a modification of Newton's law of gravity to explain the galaxy rotation problem. When the uniform velocity of rotation of galaxies was first observed, it was unexpected because Newtonian theory of gravity predicts that objects that are farther out will have lower velocities. For example, planets in the Solar System orbit with velocities that decrease as their distance from the Sun increases.

-Materialism = In philosophy, the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, matter is the only substance. To many philosophers, not only is 'physicalism' synonymous with 'materialism', but they use both even if they are talking about more than matter (like anti-matter or gravity).[1] Therefore much of the generally philosophical discussion below on materialism may be relevant to physicalism. Materialism is "a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality."

Materialism has no problem with the hypothesis of MOND or Dark matter, as both are based of of the MEASURED EFFECTS of matter. Not to mention they are still heavily discussed right now. We are still studying Dark Matter and MOND. When it comes to dark matter, I have to go by what evidence we have, which isnt much. We are still not sure what exactly dark matter is, so until then I suspend my conclusions and go with the evidence available. Lets see what science makes of it in the next decade or so. We have some good hypothesis for them out there.

But hey, Im no scientist...maybe its smurfs holding the cosmos together.

[Ubermensch]

I do not believe things unless they have a convincing body of evidence to support them. And if they turn out to be justified true beliefs then I find myself obliged to hold them since I care about whether what I believe is true. If I open myself up to one false belief then I open myself up to any false belief.

[fr0d0]

I do not believe things unless they have a convincing body of evidence to support them. And if they turn out to be justified true beliefs then I find myself obliged to hold them since I care about whether what I believe is true. If I open myself up to one false belief then I open myself up to any false belief.

I agree. My justifications might be equally sound to yours yet lead me to opposite conclusions to you. I would (naturally I think) conclude that my justifications are superior to yours because your justifications fail against my own. They'd have to or I'd draw the same conclusions as you. And vice versa.