• Decisions we have to make
    To what are you referring here as "unprovable hypotheticals"? What beliefs do you think you are being asked to accept? — aletheist

    If you are not going to put in the effort to follow the debate, I am not going to put effort into answering your questions.
  • Decisions we have to make
    What I am seeing are attempts to limit the argument to very narrow confines in order to make it appear more rational.

    But I'll restate my question, that has yet to be answered: Is it rational to just believe any assumption that pops into your head? Or should there be some type of process in order for something to be accepted as a belief?
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪aletheist


    I try not to dig into analogies too deeply, as when you do it too often take things off track. I restated my dispute for that reason.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Still an unprovable hypothetical, and my dispute is accepting it as a belief.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Is it rational to just believe any assumption that pops into your head? Or should there be some type of process in order for something to be accepted as a belief? — Jeremiah
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪Michael


    Does accepting the money mean I have to give up my core beliefs and accept an absurdity as true?

    You can't paint it into a very small box, ignore everything else, and call it rational.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Are you working on bumping up your comment count? You know that you can edit a post after submitting it, rather than just adding another one (or two or three), right? — aletheist

    I don't care.

    My point was strictly a matter of formal logic — aletheist

    There is a difference between logic and reason, and the thread is about what is rational.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Is it rational to just believe any assumption that pops into your head? Or should there be some type of process in order for something to be accepted as a belief?
  • Decisions we have to make
    You can enumerate hypotheticals all day long, but just because you did, that does not make it a rational choice for a belief.
  • Decisions we have to make
    That is like my entire argument. . . .
  • Decisions we have to make
    What am I missing? — aletheist

    hypothetical — aletheist
  • Decisions we have to make
    I mean, who really thinks it is a good idea to dictate their core beliefs on what-ifs? I need something more substantial.
  • Decisions we have to make
    The "if" is the part I am disputing.
  • Decisions we have to make
    If we knew that we only had two options, A1 and A2, and that "the worst outcome associated with A1 is at least as good as the best outcome associated with A2," then obviously the rational choice is A1 — aletheist

    This is what is in dispute here.

    However, as many have pointed out, in the actual world there are considerably more than two options - all the different concepts of God, for one thing - and the outcomes associated with them are far from certain. — aletheist

    In part this, but not so much for me.
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪aletheist


    I have read it at least 5 times.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Just because a proposed supposition is unfalsifiable does not render it useless — aletheist

    Again: read the thread.
  • Decisions we have to make
    the fundamental flaws in this argument has to do with the multiplicity of mutually opposed conceptions — Thorongil

    He/she does not want to address that, as it undermines his/her position

    .
  • Decisions we have to make
    Let me get this straight: Not one person here can address the fact it is unfalsifiable, all they can do is play games?
  • Decisions we have to make
    When I want to feel cleaver, I make sure I'm sharp. Well, or alternately, I just focus on beaver, which I often do anyway. — Terrapin Station

    Fixed.
  • Decisions we have to make
    So the issue is not that the hypothesis is imaginary - which technically is true of all retroductive conjectures - but that it is unfalsifiable — aletheist

    I believe that should be overly clear by now, that was like the first thing I said. I know you wanted to feel clever, but instead of trying to be clever, try reading everything a person posted.
  • Decisions we have to make
    I could dig out my books and quote Xenophon, but I think that is really just a diversion form the fact that you whole argument is nothing but a suppose-it-were-this-way.
  • Decisions we have to make
    According to Plato in his Phaedo there were several people. This dialogue is one recollection of what happened, according to dialogue Plato was sick. — Cavacava

    I am sure I said this, "And that part about Socrates and death was before his execution, it was when Xenophon was trying to talk him into escape."
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪Terrapin Station


    When you take the hypothetical and move it to a fact via the scientific method.

    Which is my dispute here, Cavacava's hypothesis cannot be moved, as it is unfalsifiable.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Not only does it suppose A1 is better than A2, but it also supposes only " two possible actions".

    To limit it down to only two, well that is a lot of supposing.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Is there any other kind? :D — aletheist

    For me yes; however, I don't know if you are able to a make that leap.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Algebra is hypothetical until it is applied. — Cavacava

    There is a reason I called it unfalsifiable.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Suppose that you have two possible actions, A1 and A2, and the worst outcome associated with A1 is at least as good as the best outcome associated with A2; suppose also that in at least one state of the world, A1's outcome is strictly better than A2's. Let us say in that case that A1 superdominates A2. Then rationality seems to require you to perform A1.[1]
    SEP

    Maybe you can point out irrational part of this
    -Cavacava

    A1 = if you lay in bed all day long a magic fairy will give you a pot of gold.

    A2 = if you get out of bed you will have the worst diarrhea of your life.

    What is more rational? Is it rational to stay in bed?
  • Decisions we have to make
    Let me think about it, I think offhand that it these are not hypothesis, but wagers, as in a bet, in which they obtain the assignment of certain values of utility by the person in making the decision. — Cavacava

    Your whole argument is based on a suppose, "Suppose that you have two possible actions". The problem with your argument is that is a completely imaginary hypothetical.
  • Decisions we have to make
    It should be pointed out that Xenophon's writings are generally considered a more accurate reflection of Socrates. Plato liked to take creative authority.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Cavacava, how about you pick on this statement...

    It is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. — Jeremiah
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪Cavacava


    I don't see a conflict, it should be clear enough I was speaking generally. And that part about Socrates and death was before his execution, it was when Xenophon was trying to talk him into escape.
  • Decisions we have to make
    ↪Cavacava


    If you say so, but since you didn't point out how I'll have to just take you at your word. Clearly I missed how, or else I would have not wrote it that way.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Like if I point a gun a you screaming and yelling that I am going to kill you, that seems like something real to fear.

    But is that really what you fear? Or would you fear that I actually pull the trigger? Something that has not even happened, something that at this point you can only imagine happening, but seems likely to happen.

    It is a fine line, and certainly a valid fear given the stimulus, as you suggest, but it still leaves a lot of questions. Like, at what point is it good to let fear take over our imagination? Or is it never good? It would seem reasonable to think that fear and imagination have to be ingrained in our survival instincts, which allows us to see, and response to dangers that have not happened, but could happen.

    Might be something worth investigating.
  • Decisions we have to make
    Do you think perhaps fear is, in some part, dependent on our imagination to even occur?
  • Decisions we have to make
    For me, literal fear associated with death is more along the lines of how I fear possible pain as well as thing ike going to doctors or dentists (I have a bit of a doctor phobia). — Terrapin Station

    Do you really fear the pain of going to the doctors or dentists or do you fear the pain you imagine will happen?
  • Decisions we have to make
    Suppose that you have two possible actions, A1 and A2, and the worst outcome associated with A1 is at least as good as the best outcome associated with A2; suppose also that in at least one state of the world, A1's outcome is strictly better than A2's. Let us say in that case that A1 superdominates A2. Then rationality seems to require you to perform A1.[1]
    SEP

    Maybe you can point out irrational part of this.

    "Maybe you can point out irrational part of this"

    "Suppose"

    It is an unfalsifiable hypothesis.
  • Decisions we have to make
    In the words of Bender "Afterlife? Pfft. If I'd thought I had to go through a whole 'nother life, I'd kill myself right now." One go around is enough for me,

    As Socrates points out we don't really fear death, we fear what we imagine death to be, and I would wager a person on their death bed is not in a rational frame of mind.

    I would hope on my death bed I don't fold to fear, but even if I did it would hardly validate Pascal's Wager since the motivation was not reason.
  • Logic and Analogy
    How do you understand "authority"? Do I know what I'm talking about? To the extent necessary for the content of the videos? Yes.

    Are there objective "credentials" that I can point to which would support my claim that I know what I'm talking about? Yes.

    Have I published on the topic? No.

    Either way, quit trolling. If you don't want to watch the video or talk about the subject matter, then find another thread to have a discussion in.     — ThePhilosopherFromDixie

    "How do you understand "authority"?"

    I thought you went to college. . . .

    Didn't they teach the difference between a good source and a bad source? Good sources tell you exactly who wrote it, what their qualification are, and what their source were. If you don't include that info, then how can I determine if you are a quality source of information? You are some random person on the net; I don't know who you are.

    I did start to watch your vid, but then I asked myself "Who is the ThePhilosopherFromDixie, and how can I be sure the info in this vid is good?"

    Get upset all you want, but it was your mistake; if you have credentials use them, or else how am I suppose to separate your vid from the millions of other trash vids on youtube? Before I invest time in anything I want to know where it is coming from.
  • Logic and Analogy
    I wouldn't call myself an authority on the topic. — ThePhilosopherFromDixie

    Then it is a waste of my time. Why don't I just go read work form someone that is an authority on it?
  • Logic and Analogy
    I have to agree with Hanover, written format is much easier to interact with. I also need to know what makes you an authority on the topic.
Home » Jeremiah