Probability your religion is true?

cloudyday2 · Nov 24, 2016

Robban said:
Taking the lift/elevator up to the top floor, Is there a probability
it will get stuck between floors?

Is there a possibility it will get stuck between two floors?

Googling it seems that the past history of elevators getting stuck is about 1:100000 or less.

I think your question is intended to highlight the meaning of probability. For our choice of religion, I think probability is a concept in everybody's mind that helps them make decisions. Here is a link to the "expected utility hypothesis" for decision making ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_utility_hypothesis ). So I claim that we all have probabilities in our minds - even if God might know the best choices with complete certainty. Of course everybody has different experiences and theories, so everybody's probabilities are different. As soon as we make a choice in our behavior where the outcome depends on the truth of some religion, we reveal something about these probabilities in our minds. Theoretically, we could put people in situations that help us measure these probabilities. Threatening somebody with death or torture would be one method. Bribery might be another method.

cloudyday2 · Nov 24, 2016

PloverWing said:
I have trouble placing an actual probability number on my level of certainty, because it would have to be based on statistics I don't have access to -- counting the number of possible worlds in which God does exist, doesn't exist, with or without different kinds of evidence -- you see the problem.

But for your less-mathematically-worded question, I'll attempt some non-mathematical answers:

I have high confidence in the ethical way of life that Jesus taught, because I have seen how it works out in my own life. (Probability = "pretty likely")

I have less confidence in the various metaphysical assertions of Christianity, the kinds of things that are listed in the Nicene Creed. But: If the Nicene Creed is true -- that there's a God who, in love, entered into human existence and experienced a human life, and thus transformed our life -- that's so amazing and wonderful that I have to explore that possibility. I'm aware that I might be completely wrong about the existence of God, but there's enough evidence in enough places to make me follow the path of Christianity to see if it actually turns out to be true. (Probability = "more likely than not")

There are other parts of Christian theology that are pretty speculative -- the existence of Purgatory, the exact nature of Mary, and so on -- that I just try to make a good guess about. (Probability = "who knows?")

I don't think I can choose whether to believe something; but, yes, I can choose whether to act as though something is true, in situations where I have some support for a belief but lack certainty. It happens frequently in everyday life, and it happens very frequently in my religious life.

Thanks, @PloverWing , that is exactly the sort of information I was hoping to get from people.

cloudyday2 · Nov 24, 2016

2PhiloVoid said:
As it stands, after reading Stephen D. Unwin's book, The Probability of God, I found that I disagreed with Unwin in the application of probability, even Bayesian probability, to my faith. I think Unwin's application of Bayesian probability is good for use in scientific avenues, but not much for those involving religion. The reason I say this is that I think there are too many uncontrollable variables in the assessment of religious faith, as well as too many epistemic unknowns. So, this is why I don't answer the "Street Epistemologist's" challenge.

I googled the "street epistemologist" but it wasn't clear what it was. I thought maybe it was the name of a book, but it appears to be something on facebook?

On the probabilities, my theory is that our brains use probabilities to make behavioral choices when there are unknowns. I don't buy a lottery ticket, because I think it is very unlikely that I will win. Maybe the winning ticket is the right there if only I would buy it. Or maybe it's a losing ticket. Instead I use the concept of "unlikely" to make a decision when I don't know. That seems very much like religion. I think it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, so I make choices accordingly.

EDIT: What I'm really curious about is the people who agree with me that it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, yet they choose to behave as though "Christ is risen". Maybe they are taking Christianity for a test drive. Maybe they like the feeling of purpose that Christianity gives them. Whatever.

yeshuaslavejeff · Nov 24, 2016

If someone gets in the elevator at the 1st floor in the Seattle Needle,
and the elevator works perfectly ,
what
then
are
the
odds
that
when it stops at the top floor,
they can exit it and be in the top of the St.Louis Arch ?

cloudyday2 said:
Googling it seems that the past history of elevators getting stuck is about 1:100000 or less.

yeshuaslavejeff · Nov 24, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
On the probabilities, my theory is that our brains use probabilities to make behavioral choices when there are unknowns.

Don't deal with unknowns, unless YHWH gives you a reason to.

On earth, in your home, growing up,
if
your father(or mother, or sibling or even baby sitter) stood on the porch or at the front door,
and
called you in from outside "for supper" ,
what is
the
probability
that he was calling you in to spank you instead of for supper ?
Is
there in fact any likelihood that supper would not be ready and waiting for you ?

cloudyday2 · Nov 24, 2016

One way I think about probability is that I imagine our brains as computers with algorithms that determine our behavior. We have similar algorithms, but each person has slightly different parameters based on past experiences. We can call some of those parameters "probability/confidence".

So probability is something subjective in our minds when we make decisions. If we make decisions, then we have probabilities and use them - regardless of whether they actually exist outside our minds.

Robban · Nov 24, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
Googling it seems that the past history of elevators getting stuck is about 1:100000 or less.

I think your question is intended to highlight the meaning of probability. For our choice of religion, I think probability is a concept in everybody's mind that helps them make decisions. Here is a link to the "expected utility hypothesis" for decision making ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_utility_hypothesis ). So I claim that we all have probabilities in our minds - even if God might know the best choices with complete certainty. Of course everybody has different experiences and theories, so everybody's probabilities are different. As soon as we make a choice in our behavior where the outcome depends on the truth of some religion, we reveal something about these probabilities in our minds. Theoretically, we could put people in situations that help us measure these probabilities. Threatening somebody with death or torture would be one method. Bribery might be another method.

Not question but two questions.

It is neither improbable that the
elevator will get stuck,

nor is it impossible either.

Robban · Nov 24, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
Googling it seems that the past history of elevators getting stuck is about 1:100000 or less.

I think your question is intended to highlight the meaning of probability. For our choice of religion, I think probability is a concept in everybody's mind that helps them make decisions. Here is a link to the "expected utility hypothesis" for decision making ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_utility_hypothesis ). So I claim that we all have probabilities in our minds - even if God might know the best choices with complete certainty. Of course everybody has different experiences and theories, so everybody's probabilities are different. As soon as we make a choice in our behavior where the outcome depends on the truth of some religion, we reveal something about these probabilities in our minds. Theoretically, we could put people in situations that help us measure these probabilities. Threatening somebody with death or torture would be one method. Bribery might be another method.

I don't pick mushrooms either,

but if for some reason I decided to,

what should I do,
go to the libary and loan a book on how to pick the right mushroom?

So, if I do so then,
I am putting my Life in the hands of someone who has written a book on how to pick mushrooms.

Someone who I have not seen,
do not know,

I would have to be crazy.

2PhiloVoid · Nov 24, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
I googled the "street epistemologist" but it wasn't clear what it was. I thought maybe it was the name of a book, but it appears to be something on facebook?

On the probabilities, my theory is that our brains use probabilities to make behavioral choices when there are unknowns. I don't buy a lottery ticket, because I think it is very unlikely that I will win. Maybe the winning ticket is the right there if only I would buy it. Or maybe it's a losing ticket. Instead I use the concept of "unlikely" to make a decision when I don't know. That seems very much like religion. I think it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, so I make choices accordingly.

EDIT: What I'm really curious about is the people who agree with me that it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, yet they choose to behave as though "Christ is risen". Maybe they are taking Christianity for a test drive. Maybe they like the feeling of purpose that Christianity gives them. Whatever.

I'm sure there's a few people around (~ like John Dominic Crossan) who only hold onto Christianity but with barely even a phantasmic notion of it. However, I think most people who attach themselves to Christianity and see it as their religion of choice are hoping for the best--that Jesus actually rose both physically and spiritually from the grave, or else they wouldn't bother with it at all.

Personally, I've never met anyone like John Dominic Crossan.

As to your theory that "our brains use probabilities," this idea may be contested on various epistemic grounds, or even discounted when applied to certain areas of human thought, also on epistemic grounds. So, unless you're doing science, I'd recommend not holding onto that notion too tightly, Cloudy.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

2PhiloVoid · Nov 26, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
I googled the "street epistemologist" but it wasn't clear what it was. I thought maybe it was the name of a book, but it appears to be something on facebook?

On the probabilities, my theory is that our brains use probabilities to make behavioral choices when there are unknowns. I don't buy a lottery ticket, because I think it is very unlikely that I will win. Maybe the winning ticket is the right there if only I would buy it. Or maybe it's a losing ticket. Instead I use the concept of "unlikely" to make a decision when I don't know. That seems very much like religion. I think it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, so I make choices accordingly.

EDIT: What I'm really curious about is the people who agree with me that it is unlikely that Jesus was physically resurrected from the grave, yet they choose to behave as though "Christ is risen". Maybe they are taking Christianity for a test drive. Maybe they like the feeling of purpose that Christianity gives them. Whatever.

Here's a link to the atheistic, Street Epistemology website, run by Anthony Magnabosco, and inspired by atheist philosopher, Dr. Peter Boghossian. This is what I'm referring to, Cloudy. And as you'll see, this whole approach is a method by which to supposedly challenge Christians (or whatever theist is available at the point of inquiry) as to the level of probability they are willing to individually input as a reflection of their confidence level about their faith.

And it is this very thing that I, as a (non-professional) Christian Philosopher, am working to counter-act. I am very observant as to when someone tries to use SE's "Steps 5, 6, & 7."

I do think some of the basic ideas in SE can be applied to help people clarify their thoughts and definitions, as can be done through the use of the Socratic Method. However, it has its limits.

Also, don't take my counter stance to mean that I defend and rely on the typical Christian apologetic modes and methods. My approach, rather, reflects a willingness to take the whole of Philosophy as a historical discipline in all of its variability and using that variability to explore the nature of the world and even of Christian faith.

The underlying fact of this atheistic method of spiritual insurgency (however supposedly mild it is said to be) is that it assumes the working epistemological parameters of Foundationalism as it's general framework, a framework that in and of itself is contestable.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

cloudyday2 · Nov 26, 2016

2PhiloVoid said:
Here's a link to the atheistic, Street Epistemology website, run by Anthony Magnabosco, and inspired by atheist philosopher, Dr. Peter Boghossian. This is what I'm referring to, Cloudy. And as you'll see, this whole approach is a method by which to supposedly challenge Christians (or whatever theist is available at the point of inquiry) as to the level of probability they are willing to individually input as a reflection of their confidence level about their faith.

And it is this very thing that I, as a (non-professional) Christian Philosopher, am working to counter-act. I am very observant as to when someone tries to use SE's "Steps 5, 6, & 7."

I do think some of the basic ideas in SE can be applied to help people clarify their thoughts and definitions, as can be done through the use of the Socratic Method. However, it has its limits.

Also, don't take my counter stance to mean that I defend and rely on the typical Christian apologetic modes and methods. My approach, rather, reflects an approach in taking the whole of Philosophy as a historical discipline in all of its variability and using that variability to explore the nature of the world and even of Christian faith.

The underlying fact with this atheistic method of spiritual insurgency (however supposedly mild it is said to be) is that it assumes the working epistemological parameters of Foundationalism as it's general framework, a framework that in and of itself is contestable.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

LOL, now I get it - "street epistemologist" instead of "street evangelist". Since Jack Chick has passed away, we need somebody to create atheist cartoon pamphlets for the "street epistemologists".

Chesterton · Nov 26, 2016

cloudyday2 said:
Since Jack Chick has passed away, we need somebody to create atheist cartoon pamphlets...

I can see it: two figures, one telling the other "You are in mortal danger. If you don't embrace atheism, a terrible fate awaits you when you die. You will be put in a hole and people will throw dirt on you."

Oh my Lord, that's horrible! Is there any hope? What if I repent and become an atheist?

Um, well, actually, same thing happens.

What, just dirt still?

Yeah.

But that guy on the other street corner was saying something about maybe learning to play the harp...

You get dirt.

You guys need to work on your sales pitch.

Kota · Oct 24, 2018

yeshuaslavejeff said:
Probability ?
Of any religion ?
ZERO.

YHWH and HIS WORD ?
ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

Yep!

AV1611VET · Nov 1, 2018

cloudyday2 said:
Probability your religion is true?

Based on fulfilled prophecy: 100%

juvenissun · Nov 2, 2018

cloudyday2 said:
So I'm curious what probabilities you might give that your religion is true.

Still asking bad question. No progress at all.
The answer is 100%.
Otherwise, it is not "your" religion.

TheOldWays · Nov 2, 2018

no idea. don't really care. i suppose i don't really even know what 'religion' I am. i don't really worry about 'labels'. but my path is true enough for me, which doesn't make another's path 'not true'.

Berl · Nov 2, 2018

cloudyday2 said:
I guess what I'm trying to understand is how many people "believe" their religion with high confidence. Some Christian apologists such as Lee Strobel "The Case for Christ" apparently think there are reasons to have very high confidence. (I have not read his book.) Other Christians might consider Christianity's facts to be very unlikely but not impossible.

So I was curious how much confidence people had in their religious facts.

Maybe some Christians are reluctant to admit that they do not have 100% confidence? I thought it was o.k. for a Christian to have doubts.

Doubts are part of the emotional package, trusting emotions as a gauge for truth is a gamble that doesn't always pay off, to many barnacles of thoughts like bias, rejection, preconceptions, ambrosia expectations, pack mentality, etc............ to give them much credibility.
The master of self mind control advised against thinking past Now, every age gives it a name, the Christian new age try at harnessing the infinite ended with the name Jesus claiming the message as their own, bad mistake by doing so they cursed themselves into thought hell, a mind controlled by others thoughts.

DennisTate · Nov 27, 2018

cloudyday2 said:
It seems to me that "belief" in a religion is the decision to behave as though that religion is true. A person might reason that a religion is 5% likely to be true, but that same person might decide to "believe" that religion - i.e. live according to that religion. This is similar to when a person places a large bet on a horse to win after studying all the statistics. In addition, most people don't behave as though their religion is true all the time; most people will only stick their necks out so far. This is similar to how much a person is willing to bet on their chosen horse.

So I'm curious what probabilities you might give that your religion is true.

An interesting question....... Back in 1988 - 1990 I began to suspect that there was probably something terribly wrong with my beliefs regarding the Bible but...... i was not sure what exactly was wrong so I prayed with chutzpah and asked for correction..... and for wisdom.

Since that time I have been shown error after error after error after error in my beliefs from thirty years ago. My beliefs were not entirely wrong...... but significantly wrong..... I would say..... a solid thirty percent off from centre...... and often more than that.

Even after all of the errors that I was shown I know that I am terribly lacking in real fear of G-d..... and in genuine love for others....... which I would have if I truly understood the scriptures.

One of the biggest errors that I was shown was that my belief in Soul Sleep was a serious error. I figured that out from reading near death experience accounts.

AskTheFamily · Nov 27, 2018

I don't know what most of my religion looks like. I'm discovering parts of it and leaving other parts I assume were part of it.

That said I can testify with confidence to Quran and Ahlulbayt (as). The religion attributed to them on the other hand, I cannot vouch for.

cloudyday2 · Nov 28, 2018

DennisTate said:
An interesting question....... Back in 1988 - 1990 I began to suspect that there was probably something terribly wrong with my beliefs regarding the Bible but...... i was not sure what exactly was wrong so I prayed with chutzpah and asked for correction..... and for wisdom.

Since that time I have been shown error after error after error after error in my beliefs from thirty years ago. My beliefs were not entirely wrong...... but significantly wrong..... I would say..... a solid thirty percent off from centre...... and often more than that.

Even after all of the errors that I was shown I know that I am terribly lacking in real fear of G-d..... and in genuine love for others....... which I would have if I truly understood the scriptures.

One of the biggest errors that I was shown was that my belief in Soul Sleep was a serious error. I figured that out from reading near death experience accounts.

I wonder if it is essential that spiritual truths must manifest in our universe as foolishness? In other words, spiritual truths require a spiritual language that is not available in normal reality. So the mystics who catch a glimpse of these spiritual truths in an altered state of consciousness can only bring them back to our reality in the form of of myths, rituals, rules, icons, traditions, theology, superstitions, etc. - the building blocks of religion. And of course the religious foolishness can never be more than a crude approximation to help us find our way in the dark.

So our aim is to make decisions that are informed by these spiritual truths ... by believing in religious FOOLISHNESS ... that hopefully generates the same decisions that we would make if we could comprehend the spiritual truths directly.

(I hope that makes sense. LOL I know it isn't very well written.)

Probability your religion is true?

Generic Theist

Generic Theist

Generic Theist

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Generic Theist

-----------

-----------

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Generic Theist

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Active Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

... and God saw that it was good.

Candidate

Active Member

Newbie

Junior Member

Generic Theist

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency