Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
The ethics and morality of Pascal's wager
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevil" data-source="post: 74211803" data-attributes="member: 277368"><p>Like I said, it doesn't resonate with me.</p><p>The Christian gig is a claim, claims have the burden of proof. </p><p></p><p>But also the thing about the Christian claim is that it is a poorly formed claim (from the perspective of being able to verify or falsify it). So it is a Sagan's dragon, being an unproveable claim, and the further a person goes down the rabbit hole, looking for verifiable things, then the more elaborate and elusive the claim becomes.</p><p></p><p>In my opinion, to try and tack on an element of fear, such that, "well, IF the claim is true then you have much to lose, so you may as well just go with it.."</p><p>It just seems a highly dishonest and coercive approach to me.</p><p></p><p>I'm of the position that if the claim can't be evaluated then we ask the claimer to better define the claim and in the meantime, we ignore it. Don't worry about the "Ifs"</p><p>I'm not about to walk around with a string of garlic around my neck to ward off the vampires.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevil, post: 74211803, member: 277368"] Like I said, it doesn't resonate with me. The Christian gig is a claim, claims have the burden of proof. But also the thing about the Christian claim is that it is a poorly formed claim (from the perspective of being able to verify or falsify it). So it is a Sagan's dragon, being an unproveable claim, and the further a person goes down the rabbit hole, looking for verifiable things, then the more elaborate and elusive the claim becomes. In my opinion, to try and tack on an element of fear, such that, "well, IF the claim is true then you have much to lose, so you may as well just go with it.." It just seems a highly dishonest and coercive approach to me. I'm of the position that if the claim can't be evaluated then we ask the claimer to better define the claim and in the meantime, we ignore it. Don't worry about the "Ifs" I'm not about to walk around with a string of garlic around my neck to ward off the vampires. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
The ethics and morality of Pascal's wager
Top
Bottom