The question I asked was in the realm of science rather than faith: ‘was there a creator of the universe’- that is not a faith question - did I mention religion anywhere in my post? — Devans99
Proposition 1 - There was a creator god
Assume 50% probability true to start with — Devans99
Big Bang is evidence for creator at 60% probability so combining probabilities:
Fine tuning is evidence for the creator 75% probability so:
Prime mover is evidence for the creator 25% probability so:
To double check, I’ve done the inverse proposition below:
f I know nothing about the proposition, then I cannot assign a probability value to it. — Moliere
Again, why? Where is this 60% number coming from? Why not 30%? Or 0%? Or 100%? Or 75%? — Moliere
for some proposition 1 has a 0% probability of being true, and for some it has a 100% probability of being true. — Moliere
But we know nothing about God, so we cannot assign a probability to his existence — Moliere
- You can. A little bit of common sense and statistics tells us, on average, the answer to yes/no questions (for which nothing else is known) is 50% yes, 50% no. — Devans99
- We will be more correct in a statistical sense if we pick the midpoint of normal distribution - 50% — Devans99
But we have omitted no evidence at all yet so we don’t know what the distribution is but we can still pick the statistically most likely distribution which is normal. — Devans99
Some questions that don’t have evidence baked in:
‘Is there a creator god?’
‘Is the dog nice?’
‘Is the frog fat?’
So questions can be about existence or boolean valued properties only. All of these types of questions are statistically best answered 50% / 50%. — Devans99
I'd say that it depends on the domain under consideration, and so evidence is a part of such things. — Moliere
The 3rd answer is best because the normal distribution is the most common distribution. — Devans99
Drawing a distinction between religious (or better, spiritual) experiences, and religious (or better, theological) concepts, and religion itself; inasmuch as beliefs and narratives (i.e., significant components of religion) are human universals (Brown, 1991), religion has metaphysical significance. — Galuchat
That you have linked the spiritual to affect (an aspect of responsiveness, or corporeal condition), and apokrisis has linked it to cognition (an aspect of awareness, or mental condition), thereby linking spiritual to different aspects of consciousness (mass noun), I find new and interesting. — Galuchat
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.