If your only tool is a hammer then sooner or later the whole world will start looking like a nail! — alcontali

Agreed. :smile:

My opinion is that He gives us insight along our journeys in life. Some are open to His revealings. Others are not. I personally only take my own spiritual experiences as valid (to me). — Noah Te Stroete

Is this meant as reasonable/reasoned insight? As belief it is substantial and no doubt mostly good, useful, and helpful. As philosophy it is less than nothing. And I suspect it cannot be turned into a philosophical something - nature of the beast. Try for some philosophy?

Is this meant as reasonable/reasoned insight? As belief it is substantial and no doubt mostly good, useful, and helpful. As philosophy it is less than nothing. And I suspect it cannot be turned into a philosophical something - nature of the beast. Try for some philosophy? — tim wood

God isn’t a philosophical idea. That’s not in philosophy’s purview.

I guess that’s what you were getting at. I agree.

An expert is only an expert in a certain field, but not much else.

I find it interesting that this thread has been derailed into exactly one if the examples of this phenomenon I had in mind (math proving things about religion) without me even naming it.

We all know this thread was started as a complaint against alcontali. You don’t have to be so passive-aggressive. He’s okay.

Did you meet someone who was like a god but was an atheist? I’m sorry to derail the thread, but I think we should make this public. All of us are wondering about your curious handle. :wink: :razz:

This isn't meant to be passive-aggressive toward him, I don't have any problem with him personally, and it's not just about him. I genuinely thought this an interesting philosophical problem more generally, and didn't want to make it just about him. But I find it interesting that at least two people immediately jumped to the conclusion that it was all about him, without me naming him or anyone.

It was obvious. I immediately thought of him before there were any replies. I agree that it is still a good question in the OP. Mathematicians aren’t experts in all fields, but no one is. And sometimes (or usually) experts are blinded by their rigid thinking in the prevailing system or paradigm of their field. Take everyone with a grain of salt on anything. We are totally fucking up our very existence (not to mention millions of other species’) on this once pristine planet. No one KNOWS what they’re doing, not even the world’s leaders. Well, especially them.

The inclination to trust a speaker is proportional to how reasonable are his positions on various topics and I think, ceteris paribus, clear and rational views in an advanced topic should give us warrant to trust said person's views on other issues. Yet, many here have made comments on the need for so-called experts to restrict themselves to their respective areas of expertise. I sense this distrust stems from countless instances of experts putting their feet in their mouths; fallacies like the halo effect come very close in meaning to the mistake of trusting someone because s/he's an expert in something.

That said, the errors experts commit when outside their zone of expertise are explicable in terms of a lack of knowledge or partial/complete ignorance on other subjects. What bears mentioning though is that experts are trusted not only because they're knowledgable but also because we deem them as more logical too. So, it's not surprising that we expect those who have a good background in math and the sciences to be capable of making good judgments in other topics too; we trust their |reasoning skills but unfortunately their ignorance on some topics trip them up. By the way, it's quite unreasonable for someone to expect that one person possesses encyclopedic knowledge: that's an impossibility. However, it's entirely permissible that we expect mathematicians and scientists to be more logical than the rest of us.

However, it's entirely permissible that we expect mathematicians and scientists to be more logical than the rest of us. — TheMadFool

Logic only gets you so far when it comes to questions such as, “How do I live a good life?” “What should I do with my life?” “What should humanity do to heal itself from its obvious sickness?” “Is there really such a thing as mental illness, or is there just neuro-diversity?”

Logic only gets you so far when it comes to questions such as, “How do I live a good life?” “What should I do with my life?” “What should humanity do to heal itself from its obvious sickness?” “Is there really such a thing as mental illness, or is there just neuro-diversity?” — Noah Te Stroete

Indeed. Logic alone doesn't cut it. However, a superior logic, even if only provided with bits and pieces of life's puzzles, will rarely make glaring errors.

Indeed. Logic alone doesn't cut it. — TheMadFool

Agree.

However, a superior logic, even if only provided with bits and pieces of life's puzzles, will rarely make glaring errors. — TheMadFool

Disagree. I think it would take clairvoyance and knowing the future to avoid errors.

About my moniker:

We have faith in god, some of us, because his existence is an empirical truth that has not been shown to be valid.

Yet we believe in god.

If god existed and was shown to us that he does, then we would no longer be dependent on belief to accept his existence.

Therefore in our world, god is a concept that requires belief in him.

Those who don't believe in him, or lack faith in him, are called atheists.

Those who have direct knowledge of god are not required to have faith in the existence of god.

Therefore they don't have faith in god; they are knowers that god exists, not believers.

But those who do not have belief in god are atheists.

Therefore those who know god, and therefore lack faith in him, are atheists.

God knows god, so he is an atheist.

000000000000000000

This argument was destroyed by someone earlier, on this site, in a series of forum posts, where my moniker was also in question. He or she said that belief is a form of knowledge. It is not absolute knowledge, but a form of it. Therefore all faith or belief is a form of knowledge as well.

He or she said that if you know something, then you believe it, too. You can't know something and believe its opposite!

Now I have second thoughts.

I don't know if I buy that "believing the opposite" is the same as "lack of belief", but since that was a consensus, that faith is a form of knowledge, I declared that the claim in my moniker was false. I now say that the NECESSITY of belief is missing if you know something for sure. I believe now that my critic then used an equivocation of belief. "Not believing in (something)" is not quite the same as "believing that (something) does not exist". "Not believing in (something)" allows the thing to exist; the other does not.

Therefore god not believing in himself allows his existence. Therefore his knowing he exists allows his not believing in himself.

Thank you for trying to explain it to me. I, however, still don’t get it. I wouldn’t bother clarifying as I’m not sure I would get it even then.

no problem.

May I ask you also something that you could answer me in kind, seeing that I gave full disclosure about my moniker?

Do you personally know @Alcontali? Your asserting that he (@alcontali) is okay, indicates to me that you two are personal acquaintances, if not relatives, or if not family.

A direct and decisive answer would be much appreciated. Thanks.

We all know this thread was started as a complaint against alcontali. You don’t have to be so passive-aggressive. He’s okay. — Noah Te Stroete

No, I don’t know him personally. Only on this site. It’s just my impression.

alcontali seems like he genuinely tries to be a good person and that he wants others to try to be good, too. I don’t always agree with him, but I think his intentions are good. I, on the other hand, am very narcissistic, something I’m working on.

No, I don’t know him ("him" referring to @alcontali - ed) personally. Only on this site. It’s just my impression. — Noah Te Stroete

Thanks, Noah!

I, on the other hand, got to know @alcontali as a person who puts his or her faith in front of logic; he or she has set beliefs that can't be changed for him or her even when presented by overwhelming evidence; I find such people not logical, and therefore they bug the shit out of me.

This of course does not negate the fact you claim, unknown, that he or she (@alcontali) is good. That may very well be the case, I ain't no judge of that.

Sure thing. I’m pretty honest unless someone is interrogating me with the aim of catching me in a trap.

My wife is always trying to trap me because she always knows what’s best. I guess it comes with the territory.

Likewise. Especially on a website with our true identities hidden. Being naked for truth is easy and it lifts one's soul up. One place where one can be completely honest and no holds barred when it comes to declaring his or her true values and opinions.

What fool would want to not give his or her true self under circumstances like these, eh?

I actually used my real name. :wink:

I never argue with my wife. She is always right anyway. But it is a better elixir of happiness than anything else imaginable.

I unequivocally agree.

Although we do argue from time to time.

Declaring you used your real name will start an avalanche of seraches on google, and of course this may or may be one allowable lie that is not a sign of weakness or dubiousness.

You won't need to prove that you are you, but I don't have to believe it, either.

By-the-by: my name, real name, is also God Must Be Atheist. And the profile pic was taken of me back in God school. (I failed, never graduated, after repeating grade 3 five times. I could not master the concept of 3-0=1 properly. Basic god math, if you ask the teachers.)

(-|

By-the-by: my name, real name, is also God Must Be Atheist. And the profile pic was taken of me back in God school. (I failed, never graduated, after repeating grade 3 five times. I could not master the concept of 3-0=1 properly. Basic god math, if you ask the teachers.) — god must be atheist

You’re too funny. The police and the NSA know it’s me, though. Meta-data and all.