Belief is not a choice

Blindwatchmaker said:

They are using the definition:

Belief: The acceptance that an idea or proposition is true, ie. that it comports with reality.

Click to expand...

I'll assume this means "no, 2PhiloVoid, I didn't read the articles you posted above ... in fact, I mean not to. But I do expect you to fully engage, read and understand whatever I heartily post, or have posted, thus far."

2PhiloVoid said:

You're not even supposed to be here, Clizby.

Click to expand...

Just for the casual observer in this discussion:

Appeal to Extremes

Clizby WampusCat said:

then why should I not put my faith in Allah?

Click to expand...

Because faith in YHWH and the Son, the Christ denies faith in Allah as a profitable choice. They are opposites.

Blindwatchmaker said:

Apologies.
One of the links the second one didnt work.
The other one I did look at.
It's less specific and more concerned with the overall implications of studying neural correlates.

But I'm happy to totally disregard that entire arm of evidence and my assertion woudl still stand based on psychology and human experience alone.

Click to expand...

Well, sure. I'd hate to believe that you might have to read something if you're not ... truly interested.

Blindwatchmaker said:

What a brutal and capricious theology.
I could not follow or even respect a god that sets up millions of people to be punished in that way.
Remember, not being convinced was not their choice.

Click to expand...

Giving us a free will choice with full knowledge of the results of all the options and with NO coercion to choose either way is a setup. Good luck with this...

TedT said:

Because faith in YHWH and the Son, the Christ denies faith in Allah as a profitable choice. They are opposites.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. Why should I put my faith in YHWH rather than Allah?

Blindwatchmaker said:

Once you remove reason and evidence from the equation...

Click to expand...

Claiming we remove reason and evidence is fallacious:


The BIBLE IS EVIDENCE:

Acceptable to you or not it is the premier evidence and claim that GOD is involved with humans to redeem us from evil. The Book is there, it is real. I will give you a copy if you doubt its reality. It has been an amazing in world influence out of proportion to its beginnings in a small dessert tribe from which it came.


THE LIFE OF CHRIST IS EVIDENCE:

Acceptable to you or not, the stories life of Christ have had a great impact upon whole cultures which proves its evidentiary status. Good evidence or insufficient evidence but it is evidence.


THE INDWELLING HOLEY SPIRIT IS EVIDENCE:

Acceptable to you or not, those who experience a direct interaction / conversation / influence of God in their lives and thoughts have this experience as evidence. We will not be gaslighted by those who claim we are untrustworthy and making things up, (a favourite ploy of pedophiles) just because we accept the evidence we have seen which a skeptic has not yet seen.


THE CHANGE IN OUR VALUES SYSTEM IS EVIDENCE:

Acceptable to you or not, those who have been brought to repentance (had their eyes opened to their evil by being allowed to be evil until the suffering they have caused breaks them) and rebirth know they are different people and this metamorphosis is real and acceptable to them as evidence of GOD's work with them whether it can be argued it might be caused by other causes than GOD or not. All good things can be perverted to the use of evil, nothing is totally sacred on earth.


THE WITNESS OF PEOPLE WITH A SIMILAR EXPERIENCE IS EVIDENCE:

Acceptable to you or not, billions of people attesting to something is evidence. If they did not attest, there is no evidentiary value in their silence just like there is no evidence of a deity named HRUXIS because he has no book, no history of interaction with anyone, and no one attesting to his existence...no evidence!


A LACK OF EVIDENCE IS NOT PROOF OF A LACK OF REALITY:

For a hundred years sailors who made it as far as Australia reported seeing black swans. They were scorned by the British natural societies as liars or hallucinators because there was no evidence! ...until there was. Someone finally got a carcass to Britain and this led to the the understanding of the logical fallacy that no evidence must mean no reality.

NO EVIDENCE is often seen to mean 'no proof' in those writings about the roots of Christianity. No proof is the obvious meaning of no evidence when there is abundant evidence for belief...but it is not universally accepted which seems to be the only proof that 'no evidence' accepts.

Blindwatchmaker said:

...its a simple matter of luck whether or not your faith is pointing towards truth or fantasy.

Click to expand...

Still miss the point eh? It was not a matter of luck, but of hope. Which reality do you hope is the reality that will bring you the best life, Christ's or Allah's or Buddha's or secular materialism???

Clizby WampusCat said:

Yes, I agree. Why should I put my faith in YHWH rather than Allah?

Click to expand...

Check them out and choose the one who seems to be the best fit for your life.

TedT said:

Check them out and choose the one who seems to be the best fit for your life.

Click to expand...

No thanks. I won't follow any of them until I find sufficient evidence to convince me they exist. Going with the best fit is not a reliable pathway to truth.

Clizby WampusCat said:

No thanks. I won't follow any of them until I find sufficient evidence to convince me they exist. Going with the best fit is not a reliable pathway to truth.

Click to expand...

How do you find truth then?

Blindwatchmaker said:

This is not a valid criticism.
My contention applies even to non-extreme cases.
If you believe any truth claim about the world it's because the evidence has convinced you of this.
I really cant believe someone as obviously intelligent as you is pushing back on such an obvious statement.

What I will concede, is that belief is not binary. There are strong beliefs and those which are held more tentatively.
But the predictor for this is also not volition. It's strength of evidence combined with predetermined cognitive/personal factors which are not subject to choice.

Click to expand...

If you say so, Captain Picard ...

TedT said:

How do you find truth then?

Click to expand...

This topic is more complicated than this but in summary I evaluate the evidence that I am presented with or researched to see if it convinces me. I will be either convinced or not based on different standards of evidence that are in proportion to the claim. Such as if you said you own a white car, I will believe you based on that statement. I know a lot of people own a white car and if it is untrue the consequences of me knowing that false information are low. If you claim to be able to walk through solid walls then I will need more evidence than just your word for me to believe it.

Also remember that a lack of belief does not equal unbelief. For example, I don't believe a god exists but that does not mean that I believe gods do not exist. I don't have good enough evidence to believe either claim.

TedT said:

Giving us a free will choice with full knowledge of the results of all the options and with NO coercion to choose either way is a setup. Good luck with this...

Click to expand...

The problem is there is not sufficient evidence to know if it is true. What if I choose Christianity and Allah is the true god? There would be a choice to make if I was convinced god is real. Until then, there is no choice to make.