Aristotle's proof of God is fascinating.

So not an experiment? Then I don't know what.

No, you insulted me by not coming up with better answer.

It appears to be a person wanting to explore an argument, but the insults come out of nowhere. And the support for reason being the source of morals just has the flavor of an intelligent person trying to write nonsense.

said all those things in my reply to you above, it's just that now I've numbered them. — Bartricks

Cool. I'm just curious what this thread really is. Psychology experiment?

Lovely.

Partly aesthetic and partly directly personal?

You are asserting that reason is the source of moral prescriptions with no argument to support it.

Why do you embrace Christianity?

How then does it make sense to choose one path of belief over another?

You are asserting that reason is the source of moral prescriptions with no argument to support it.

You are asserting that reason is the source of moral prescriptions with no argument to support it.

Sure my point is you can tell him that he himself is an irrational being, and therefore he has no argument for your ( or anyone's ) belief in God. — 3017amen

Science has an irrational foundation. Is that what you mean? We're all irrational at base?

You are asserting that reason is the source of moral prescriptions with no argument to support it.

And moral prescriptions are among the prescriptions of reason, are they not? For instance, if an act is morally prescribed, then we necessarily have some reason to do it, don't we? Well why? Because for an act to be morally prescribed just is for it to be being prescribed by reason, and what it is for us to have reason to do an act is for reason to be prescribing it. — Bartricks

Your argument suffers from the bare assertion fallacy.

I don't use the word "god" to pick out anything in the universe. I agree we don't have the universe figured out.

If my community values something it is not necessarily morally valuable — Bartricks

And you're saying that if reason values something, it is necessarily morally valuable?

Why?

If moral values have to be held by someone other than you, why not just point to the community you're a part of?

don’t think we could know whether it is rational or not without understanding your reasons for doing so. What is the scientific research? — NOS4A2

It's a hypothetical. If I think I have a good reason for following bird omens, aren't my actions rational?

In other words, did he refer to the Christian God? — 3017amen

I don't think he specified. I could probably link to the debate if you want to see it, but that was just what spurred my question about irrational beliefs. It's not what I was asking.

96% positive results should put it beyond the region of mere coincidence but something else behaves similarly - bias. — TheMadFool

If I was unconsciously biased in favor of my method, how does that bear on the rationality of my beliefs?

Most decisions are made by such non-rational, not irrational methods. Which is fine. — T Clark

What's the difference?

Did it hold out to your scrutiny? After careful examination of the evidence did it establish the fact that birds can aid in decisions — TheMadFool

The research showed that 96% of the time, my decisions were awesome.

Therefore it's rational?

I think this is a case of ambiguity arising from lack of information that is confusing some of the other posters. — Judaka

Sorry about that. I dont make decisions using bird omens. I was listening to an intelligence squared debate about whether science refutes God. One pro-speaker, Lawrence Krause (sp?) said that belief in god is irrational.

I don't think that ends up being a refutation, but since then, I've been pondering the idea of a proposition that's necessarily held irrationally. Is there such a thing?

Could belief in bird omens be rational? I think the responders are all saying that it can be rational.

That's leading me to wonder what irrationality is. Is the wording just used to express condemnation?

What’s irrational is seeking or expecting a verifiable objective account of a decision making process by that which is not, and can never be, a first-person perspective. — Mww

The bird is a sign. We use signs all the time. If it's cloudy, I take it as a sign that it might rain. I don't have to understand what clouds are or how they relate to rain to use clouds in this way.

But if I do, is it irrational?

I agree, I think we need more information. OP can you please share more information? — 3017amen

Just exploring what it means to hold a belief irrationally.

In terms of purely instrumental rationality, it's not irrational. In terms of rationality as a more general faculty of applying your mental resources in an effective (for solving problems) and non-contradictory manner, it probably is irrational. — Echarmion

As long as an approach is effective and non-contradictory, it could be called rational?

People who behave in the way you describe are working from a set of beliefs that they haven't subjected to scrutiny. People who reject such a worldview have. — TheMadFool

But suppose I learned this superstition from a community of white magic practitioners (it used to be common). It's been scrutinized. Is it rational now?

Well I believe on the basis of walking out my front door many times that there is no danger of falling into a fiery pit if I walk out of my front door. — unenlightened

Is it rational to believe you won't fall into a fiery pit?

But I guess it rather depends on what decisions, and what research. If you are a hunter, it might be reasonable to base your lunch recipe on what bird you come across. — unenlightened

I was trying to evoke a superstitious belief. There is such a thing as using birds as omens.