Scale of belief; does God exist?

[Comet]

I chose "other". Simply because whether God exists or not, it is not really relavent to my beliefs

 

[Fluffy]

"Very low probability but short of zero" is the closest approximation to what I believe but it is hardly accurate. I am more an agnostic but believe it is irrational for me to act as if God might exist. I consider him to be irrelevant/unsupported/unexperienced by myself but not improbable. I am far from impartial.

What is the difference between "100% probability" and "certainty" for those who have made the distinction?

 

[Scarlett Wampus]

I don't believe in God, not because of low or zero probability, but because of the lack of persuasive evidence or reasons to believe that a God could or does exist. That's not quite the same thing.

No its not, and I was a little concerned about people complaining about how appropriate it was to talk in terms of probabilty when I posted the poll. I was pushed for time so it was quick and dirty. That's my excuse.

To me this scale is utterly irrlevant and misses the point. As I've said many times before, the most important question isn't whether or not God exists, it's if God does exist, what does God mean to me? Faith in God must result in a difference in behavior. If not, it matters not to me wherther you are 100% sure or 10% sure. I would much rather someone not believe in God yet live their lives as if compassion and justice have meaning, than someone be 100% sure of God's existence and live their lives as if there's no difference.

Trying to get my head around the implications of this. So...personally it matters little what someone believes as long as virtue, in particular compassion and justice, has meaning. However, God means something to you and I'm guessing its not merely an ethical position isolated from metaphysics. Am I wrong? If not I'd be interested in hearing how it plays out for you.

Apologies to others who find the poll irrelevant but thanks for posting why.

 

[Buttercup]

Apologies to others who find the poll irrelevant but thanks for posting why.

I don't find it irrelevant at all SW. I'm always interested to read what people say when this question comes up. Besides, it opens the door for further interesting discussion.

 

[Mathematician]

I chose:

6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. "I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."

 

[Scarlett Wampus]

I don't find it irrelevant at all SW. I'm always interested to read what people say when this question comes up. Besides, it opens the door for further interesting discussion.

Oh, well people finding the poll irrelevant isn't a problem at all since that's relevant to discussion too of course. I wasn't sulking

 

[lilithu]

Trying to get my head around the implications of this. So...personally it matters little what someone believes as long as virtue, in particular compassion and justice, has meaning. However, God means something to you and I'm guessing its not merely an ethical position isolated from metaphysics. Am I wrong? If not I'd be interested in hearing how it plays out for you.

I'm just really tired of the "does God exist?" argument. People waste so much time and energy on it. And they divde themselves along the answers to this question. Yes, for me the ethics are what is most important and metaphysics takes a backseat to that. I can't really be sure of the truth of either the ethics or the metaphysics, but I can be sure of the outcome of how we conduct our ethics.

Two things:

1) The question of the existence of God has traditionally been and continues to be a question asked by middle-class, white Westerners. In Latin America and amongst many African-Americans, and other people who are traditionally oppressed, they do not have the time for such navel-gazing. The question isn't about the existence of God but rather, what does the existence of God mean in a world where there is injustice and suffering. Where does God stand on injustice? What does that empower me to do? What does that require me to do?

2) As the Buddha said, if a man is shot with a poison arrow, what is most pressing is that he receive treatment. If he insists on knowing the answers to questions like who made the arrow and out of what, etc, he will die before he gets the answers. The Buddha was speaking directly about dwelling on the answers of these unanswerable metaphysical questions.

I don't care whether or not someone believes in God. I do care whether or not they waste time arguing about it.
Ok, so you believe, what are you going to do about it?
Ok, so you don't believe, what are you going to do about it?

 

[McBell]

To me this scale is utterly irrlevant and misses the point. As I've said many times before, the most important question isn't whether or not God exists, it's if God does exist, what does God mean to me? Faith in God must result in a difference in behavior. If not, it matters not to me wherther you are 100% sure or 10% sure. I would much rather someone not believe in God yet live their lives as if compassion and justice have meaning, than someone be 100% sure of God's existence and live their lives as if there's no difference.

This comes way to close to being Pascals Wager for me.

I have not completely ruled out the existance of god(s) because though there are several arguments against the existance of a god, they do not rule out the exist of any of the possible gods.

Someone mentioned that this would make me an agnostic theist.
I prefer Apathetic Agnostic myself, because personally, I do not care one way or another. I just happen to find all this religious talk facinating.

 

[lilithu]

This comes way to close to being Pascals Wager for me.

I don't see how it's Pascal's Wager. I am not hedging my bets (or encouraging others to do so). I'm saying that the whole discussion is a waste of time.

 

[Scarlett Wampus]

Ok Lilithu fair enough. Those two things you mentioned don't seem to me grounds enough for always passing over the question but I can understand why it can seem rather pointless when other things are more pressing.

 

[McBell]

I don't see how it's Pascal's Wager. I am not hedging my bets (or encouraging others to do so). I'm saying that the whole discussion is a waste of time.

I did not say it is a Pascals Wager.
I said it is to close to a Pascals Wager for me.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm just really tired of the "does God exist?" argument. People waste so much time and energy on it. And they divde themselves along the answers to this question.

But you listen and participate, then judge others for wasting too much time and energy on it.

 

[lilithu]

I said it was to close to a Pascals Wager for me.

How so?

 

[McBell]

How so?

I guess for me this thread is designed for AFTER you have settled the whole 'If God Exists" conundrum for yourself.
If you haven't then is seems like the verge of a Pascals Wager

 

[lilithu]

But you listen and participate, then judge others for wasting too much time and energy on it.

Jay, I am surprised that you of all people would call me on judging others for their posts.

As I told SW, I am tired of this endless argument. There is no reason why someone can't particpate and then decide that it's pointless and say so.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Jay, I am surprised that you of all people would call me on judging others for their posts.

I didn't call you for judging others on their posts. I noted that you judge others for wasting too much time and effort on a question that I, along with centuries of philosophers, find worthy of discourse.

There is no reason why someone can't particpate and then decide that it's pointless and say so.

No reason whatsoever.

========================​

I wonder, by the way, whether an evaluation of the worth of this topic can possibly be independent on the specifics of one's position on the topic.

 

[Fluffy]

I don't care whether or not someone believes in God. I do care whether or not they waste time arguing about it.
Ok, so you believe, what are you going to do about it?
Ok, so you don't believe, what are you going to do about it?

If you mean that arguing to convert others to your stance on God is waste of time then I agree with you but I would extend that to that general motive for argument.

I don't understand how ethical conduct can be important whilst whether God exists is unimportant if you admit that at least for some people (and I would argue most if not all people), the former will be in part determined by the latter?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I don't understand how ethical conduct can be important whilst whether God exists is unimportant if you admit that at least for some people (and I would argue most if not all people), the former will be in part determined by the latter?

Unless by "unimportant" one means "frustrating" ...

 

[lilithu]

I wonder, by the way, whether an evaluation of the worth of this topic can possibly be independent on the specifics of one's position on the topic.

Well, I gave an argument from liberation theology, which is decidedly theistic. And I gave an argument from the Buddha, who was decidedly non-theistic.

 

[lilithu]

If you mean that arguing to convert others to your stance on God is waste of time then I agree with you but I would extend that to that general motive for argument.

If you're arguing about something that can be proven either way, I don't see why it would be a waste of time. Or, if the argument is of moral consequence.

I don't understand how ethical conduct can be important whilst whether God exists is unimportant if you admit that at least for some people (and I would argue most if not all people), the former will be in part determined by the latter?

Actually, I think that people's ethical conduct is determined pretty independantly of their belief in God. At least I have not observed theists to act more ethically than non-theists nor vice versa.