Theist evidence/arguments.

[anx66]

So do you have trust in your intellectual faculties capability to discover truths about reality?

Let's say that I did have trust in my intellectual faculties, where would you go from there?

 

[Sanoy]

The oxford dictionary defines reliable as, able to be depended on or trusted. I trust my intellectual faculties to be capable of discovering truths about reality the majority of the time.

Is that sufficient for you to start your argument?

I know this all seems like semantics, but there has to be some nuance involved with discussions of this sort

Yes, that is sufficient.

So our goal here is to explain the fact that you have reliable intellectual faculties capable of discovering truths about reality for the majority of the time. A Calculator can be explained in fully physical terms with the exception of the meaning of it's display. The meaning of the display, that mathematical truth, requires a teleological explanation. The goal of the calculator is to represent a mathematical truth, and it's physical makeup is so arranged precisely to represent meaning. The reason I trust the machine is primarily due to it's teleological explanation, rather than the factory that assembled it's physical make up. I would never trust the factory to assemble a meaningful calculator without a teleological plan because a random construction would carry no meaning in regards to truth, both because it would be improbable to have acquired the truth when one presses the return, and without a teleological explanation there is no reason to trust what the calculator returns.

An unbiased chance does not increase the likelihood of something, so if an explanation increases the likelihood of something it should be preferred over an explanation that does not increase the likelihood of something. Teleological explanations do just that. The likelihood of a randomly built calculator reporting the correct answer is low, but if it has a a teleological explanation that likelihood goes up dramatically. Teleology is product of mind, we trust our home calculator because there is a mind behind it, not because it says "made in Taiwan". We should not have any reason to trust our intellectual faculties if our mind does not have an adequate explanation for why those intellectual faculties can be trusted. There are no natural theories that can provide that trust because natural selection is not concerned with truth, but survival behavior. I don't need to know the truth about something to behave in a way that leads to survival and procreation, a lie will do that. For any behavior there is only one true belief that can acquire that behavior and a multitude of false beliefs that can acquire that behavior. So for any behavior it is more probable than not that the belief for that behavior is false rather than the one true belief in the jar.

So a strong teleological explanation, like God, better explains and greatly increases the likelihood of the trustworthiness of our intellectual faculties, than non teleological, or weak teleological explanations.

(It's my time to work out, but I'll be by my computer off and on for the next few hours.)

 

[cloudyday2]

Hi there,
Give me an argument or two as to why I should believe in God? Not including the sentence or one like this: "You know there is a God really."

Steve C.

P.S. Was a "Christian"/christian for many years.

One of my close atheist friends said he sometimes felt like there was nothing to life except to "eat and poop and die". Have you ever read Ecclesiastes? - "vanity, vanity, all is vanity". Everything we do truly amounts to nothing. We might as well go on a killing spree to amuse ourselves or even kill ourselves. Why not? - we all are going to be dead soon enough anyway. Of course we can feel happy when we get what we want, but eventually it will be taken from us. We are like ants biting each other and struggling to climb to the top of the anthill, and then what have we accomplished - nothing except to show that we were short-sighted and self-centered.

That's not an argument to believe in God, but it is an argument to search for something more than to "eat and poop and die". Maybe there is nothing more, but we should at least search IMO.

 

[Tinker Grey]

The reason I trust the machine is primarily due to it's teleological explanation, rather than the factory that assembled it's physical make up.

I suggest that the reason you trust anything, including the calculator, is experience. Plenty of things with "teleological explanations" are failures. If all the calculators that were ever designed and manufactored failed to do sums, you'd not trust them regardless of their teleos.

I trust my senses, by and large, because I can get reliable results, by and large, by basing my predictions on them. No teleos required.

 

[Sanoy]

I suggest that the reason you trust anything, including the calculator, is experience. Plenty of things with "teleological explanations" are failures. If all the calculators that were ever designed and manufactored failed to do sums, you'd not trust them regardless of their teleos.

Experience can evoke a sense that something is reliable, yes, and that is merely an intuition of our intellectual faculties. And that is correct that if my experience of a calculator was that it only produced the wrong answer then I would distrust the teleological explanation for the calculator and assume that it's random answers are the product of it's random construction. However this situation has the luxury of a third party, namely the intellectual faculty which considers the state of the calculator. That luxury of a third party is not provided for the intellectual faculties themselves, and that includes the intellectual products of our senses. The intellectual faculties must have an explanation that acquires their purported ability, it does no good to say that our intellectual faculties tell us our intellectual faculties work.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Experience can evoke a sense that something is reliable, yes, and that is merely an intuition of our intellectual faculties. And that is correct that if my experience of a calculator was that it only produced the wrong answer then I would distrust the teleological explanation for the calculator and assume that it's random answers are the product of it's random construction. However this situation has the luxury of a third party, namely the intellectual faculty which considers the state of the calculator. That luxury of a third party is not provided for the intellectual faculties themselves, and that includes the intellectual products of our senses. The intellectual faculties must have an explanation that acquires their purported ability, it does no good to say that our intellectual faculties tell us our intellectual faculties work.

Reliability is a quality we impute to objects/processes. It is not something intrinsic to an object or process.

Regardless of teleological explanation, I hear you failing to impute reliability to the calculators WRT their ostensible function. You *know* they are designed and yet that design has nothing to do with their reliability.

 

[Sanoy]

Reliability is a quality we impute to objects/processes. It is not something intrinsic to an object or process.

Regardless of teleological explanation, I hear you failing to impute reliability to the calculators WRT their ostensible function. You *know* they are designed and yet that design has nothing to do with their reliability.

Reliable mental faculties have already been defined, and agreed upon in the thread. Every Calculator I have purchased has achieved the goals of their creation.

 

[Tolworth John]

Justice does sometimes disappear, if God is taken out of the equation, because the world isn't always fair. Morality doesn't disappear, it is just transformed into something different. Equality is always going to be a difficult one, as you're saying there is a God and yet people don't treat people of colour, Christians, Muslims, Homosexuals etc. equally.

In answer to your question we believe in these things because we want to live in a better world. Cue...

So you would be happy to live and work in China? or to start promoting Christianity in islamic countries, or even oppose the current secular fad and be confident that you would be treated fairly?

Even in America the rejection of Christian based morality see strange desissionsbeing made, let alone the problems found in countries where there is no equality under the law.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Reliable mental faculties have already been defined, and agreed upon in the thread. Every Calculator I have purchased has achieved the goals of their creation.

And you believe this because of your experience. That is the point in question.

Usually this line of argument is that we trust our senses because they are designed. I say that you trust them because you get reliable results (until such time as you need to see a dementia specialist).

We might wonder as to why they are reliable, but this is not why we trust them. We trust them because they are predictable--we get the results we expect. The origin of the process is immaterial to this trust.

I trust gravity to work in the consistent way I've come to expect. And yet, there is no definitive theory as to how it works. I trust it without regard to its mechanisms.

 

[Sanoy]

And you believe this because of your experience. That is the point in question.

Usually this line of argument is that we trust our senses because they are designed. I say that you trust them because you get reliable results (until such time as you need to see a dementia specialist).

We might wonder as to why they are reliable, but this is not why we trust them. We trust them because they are predictable--we get the results we expect. The origin of the process is immaterial to this trust.

I trust gravity to work in the consistent way I've come to expect. And yet, there is no definitive theory as to how it works. I trust it without regard to its mechanisms.

No, I don't believe my intellectual faculties are capable because of my experience, that would be circular as I mentioned. I believe they are reliable because they have a teleological explanation in addition to their physical explanation. Further, I trust that experience means something, in regards to truth, because that intuition itself has a teleological explanation.

 

[gaara4158]

Reliable doesn't mean that it never fails, but that you can put your trust in it. So do you have trust in your intellectual faculties capability to discover truths about reality?

We have no choice but to trust our intellectual faculties, since a conscious choice not to trust them would also come from our intellectual faculties, invoking a contradiction. We also use our intellectual faculties to observe anything at all, reality or otherwise, so we couldn't turn to our observations for help. So what you're really asking is "Do you think what you observe is reality?" And the answer to that is far more complex than a simple "yes" or "no." What you observe and experience could be the only reality there is, or it could be something completely different. If you can figure out how to tell which it is, you let me know. Until then I'll be here assuming it's all real because I have no choice.

 

[eleos1954]

Hi there,
Give me an argument or two as to why I should believe in God? Not including the sentence or one like this: "You know there is a God really."

Steve C.

P.S. Was a "Christian"/christian for many years.

Since you were a "Christian"/christian ... Do you find the principles of Gods Word (how to treat one another) good principles to live by?

 

[anx66]

We should not have any reason to trust our intellectual faculties if our mind does not have an adequate explanation for why those intellectual faculties can be trusted.

An adequate reason for trusting my intellectual faculties is that for the majority of the time they help me to judge reality very well. I am able to predict what would happen if I did X, and a lot of the time that prediction is correct. I don't need to know how it happened that I acquired the ability to think logically, to be able to use logic.

There are no natural theories that can provide that trust because natural selection is not concerned with truth, but survival behaviour.

Our intellectual faculties, such as logic, aid survival and therefore we trust them. There is no need to involve the concept of purpose, with regard to our brains capacity to think logically.

I don't need to know the truth about something to behave in a way that leads to survival and procreation, a lie will do that.

You do need to know the truth in order to survive. For example, you need to know that certain foods won't kill you. And Logic is an example of a mental faculty, which aids this.

For any behavior there is only one true belief that can acquire that behavior and a multitude of false beliefs that can acquire that behavior.

I don't quite follow what you are saying here. Are you saying that only one belief causes an action?

So for any behavior it is more probable than not that the belief for that behavior is false rather than the one true belief in the jar.

I don't quite follow this either. Are you saying we might not know what caused us to do a certain thing, and that there could be any number of reasons for us to carry out a particular action.

So a strong teleological explanation, like God, better explains and greatly increases the likelihood of the trustworthiness of our intellectual faculties, than non teleological, or weak teleological explanations.

I think that purpose could be possible, but natural selection presents us with an alternative. So, I think this argument lacks a definitive conclusion.

 

[anx66]

So you would be happy to live and work in China? or to start promoting Christianity in islamic countries, or even oppose the current secular fad and be confident that you would be treated fairly?

Even in America the rejection of Christian based morality see strange desissionsbeing made, let alone the problems found in countries where there is no equality under the law.

Why would I want to work in China or promote Christianity or oppose a secular "fad"? I don't understand.

The reason I say justice disappears without God, is that it is clear that some people will go unpunished, without a God. And wishful thinking for judgement on these people does not mean that a God exists.

 

[anx66]

Since you were a "Christian"/christian ... Do you find the principles of Gods Word (how to treat one another) good principles to live by?

Some principles seem good, but some seem terrible.

 

[Greengardener]

Hi Steve C. I feel really sure that I could not successfully argue you into believing. About the best I could do is explain why it makes sense to me to believe. Obviously it makes sense to you not to believe. I reckon we'll find out eventually, but we're dealing with intangible things here, easily discounted. My "proofs" relate to my experiences and my reading of a book that I have reason to believe contains words that God spoke and that seem to me to make life work. Honestly it's all subjective as far as anyone else is concerned. I also believe from that same book that you were made in God's image. I'm not sure you can find Him by your reasoning, but I certainly don't think He provided you with a brain and then didn't want you to use it. I simply think there is more than reasoning, more than we can see, test, or validate objectively. I'm not sure we can understand truth when we limit ourselves to our natural abilities, like animals. Grant that there are some exceptions, but most of the animal kingdom would snatch food if hungry without concern for each other, would fight for breeding rights, would kill their young or ours and all sorts of other activities that I'd rather not see in society. I prefer society where some or most of us have concluded that more altruistic values are preferable, even though it may mean that we are considerate when we would prefer to be angry and even are self-denying or self-sacrificing. I think that speaks to a component that comes from God. But I can't prove that to you.

When I chose to believe as a young adult, I left a life of unbelief. I wasn't a classic case of early indoctrination into these values, although I did recognize that the 10 Commandments existed and that our laws in America were (at least then) considered to be at least loosely built on those in defining boundaries. I learned early how selfish and evil humanity could be because I had enough unsupervised time to find out what I could perpetrate. I couldn't manage to quit the downward spiral. As I saw the harm I was creating mounting over the years, I realized how much I needed help. I accepted the forgiveness of God offered when Jesus took the punishment for those evils on Himself and I accepted His love. I took on His life instead of my own wretched one. I experienced a huge breaking of the chains of bondage to evil. I'm not sure anyone could convince me that God doesn't exist or that He doesn't care because it's absolute truth to me now.

Would it be worth asking Him for help to discover Him? What would you have to lose if you found Him to be as kind as I found He is?

Here to help...it's a rough life being human and we're in this together.

 

[anx66]

No, I don't believe my intellectual faculties are capable because of my experience, that would be circular as I mentioned. I believe they are reliable because they have a teleological explanation in addition to their physical explanation. Further, I trust that experience means something, in regards to truth, because that intuition itself has a teleological explanation.

So, if you wasn't a Christian, you wouldn't believe your intellectual faculties were reliable. So, you would stay in bed all day, because you would be scared to do anything out of the belief that you could be wrong about reality.

You say: "Further, I trust that experience means something, in regards to truth, because that intuition itself has a teleological explanation."

Could you elaborate on this quote?

 

[anx66]

Would it be worth asking Him for help to discover Him? What would you have to lose if you found Him to be as kind as I found He is?

I've done that a million times (excuse the hyperbole). Some Christians would say that I have never been a Christian, if I have fallen away. Some Christians would say that I was a Christian, who has fallen away. I've done everything expected of me and I believed wholeheartedly that I was a Christian. I've repented wholeheartedly, sobbing. I've asked God to reveal himself. Which some Christians say is a good thing and other Christians say don't test God.
The Christian religion seems to be a whole group of different religions, and the answers you receive are varied. No two people believe the same thing.
I don't say any of these things to offend, but as a seeker after truth, I sometimes need to share where I'm coming from. I'm glad for you, that you are so certain, I also once had that certainty, but it it has ebbed away.

Thanks for your kind comments
Anx66

P.S. I'm all for altruism and love.

 

[eleos1954]

Some principles seem good, but some seem terrible.

well, can only wish you good "luck" in your earthly life as an atheist

I pray someday you will return to the Lord, would like to see you there someday. Amen.

 

[Sanoy]

We have no choice but to trust our intellectual faculties, since a conscious choice not to trust them would also come from our intellectual faculties, invoking a contradiction. We also use our intellectual faculties to observe anything at all, reality or otherwise, so we couldn't turn to our observations for help. So what you're really asking is "Do you think what you observe is reality?" And the answer to that is far more complex than a simple "yes" or "no." What you observe and experience could be the only reality there is, or it could be something completely different. If you can figure out how to tell which it is, you let me know. Until then I'll be here assuming it's all real because I have no choice.

We have a choice to trust our faculties or not, the choice doesn't have to be rationally derived, but if that choice is rationally derived there should be an explanation that acquires it. With the exception of this thread, every time I have brought this up people deny their own intellectual faculties - that is why I took the steps I did. It's a bit like cops/robbers. If you turn the siren on too early the robber hides all the merchandise to reacquire it at night. In any case, the OP has confirmed a belief in reliable intellectual faculties, and that is what is at hand.