What if?

[Twilight Hue]

As an atheist the most common one I hear is "What if you're wrong?" The rest of it goes something like "if I'm wrong I'll never know but if you're wrong you'll burn in hell for eternity." aka Pascal's Wager.

I'd counter with the Taoist adage of, "Maybe. Maybe not."

 

[sun rise]

What if we're wasting our time discussing whether or not what if is a reasonable question or not?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

"What if" is a great tool for considering other possibilities and perspectives. Of course, it is only valuable when also taking into account what, who, when, where, why, and, most importantly, how.

 

[Cap'n MacDougal]

Why are people afraid of What If questions?

I was told in a Christian chat that it's pointless to ask What If because it assumes something that is not true. Since there were new Christians in the chat room, they didn't want to pose questions that their could be other paths to the truth. Puting aside what is true and what is not, whats up with the What If questions?

I ask the religious. Of course, non-religious identifiers can answer too.

Good morning, Carlita.

I find it to be more prevalent (as others have noted) among fundie believers. It's a common form of personal information censorship. The epistemic equivalent of hiding under the covers. Further, there is a sort of social norm that while religion can be discussed as a macro aggregated unit, one's personal belief need not be. Unless, of course, the merits of one's religion are being discussed, or specific instances which (although ad hoc) confirm belief. Anyway, by limiting the exposure to competing hypotheses it will increase the probability that the beliefs track "correctly" to desired outcomes.

Revelatory religions come with a wide variety of immunization strategies for this sort of thing. E.g. "the natural man cannot understand spiritual things."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What if we're wasting our time discussing whether or not what if is a reasonable question or not?

Depends. If the one you speak with someone who says he generally wants to know something you discussed or thats been already discussed that doesnt mean its a closed case. Some people leaen from challenge others learn from ol' style sit down talk. What Ifs challenge the mind Not the heart. So, its not useless if you trust the other party who wants to learn about faith rather than assume (assuming) he does not because he questions it.

I mean, for example, you have some atheist angry with religion. They challenge a believer (usually christian for some reason) to understand whats not clicking in their head. What Ifs give them the opportunity to psychologically believe just because they ask the question they dont believe it when its discussed. Its not worthless. In this case it helps the said atheist in his struggling in defining faith without making it "absolute" as believers do.

What Ifs are also seen as philosophical questions. Looking into Gods existence in general with no specific religion in mind is a worth while conversation. Why? Believers (any) usually say "its something one cannot understand". What Ifs give that leaverage of making a claim of understanding "to talk about it not degrade it". If we just said God in an atheist convo, it means nothing. Philisophically, like Plato and hid cave, the question can mean so much more.

What else? What Ifs get not only atheists a medium to talk about and understand the unknown, it helps believers who can handle a convo against their beliefs to think outside the box. He or she faith strengthens as when you answer the What Ifs you become more comfortable in believing God exists--as a fact. As long as its faith, What Ifs are pretty resonable question. Faith doesnt proove something fact; so, why Not help others understand this with the use of the What If method? Why think its useless when its not testing anyones religion its just creating a reason to think out of the box.

How can you grow in faith if you dont step out the garden from time to time? Faith is not something we talk about as a fact to others who do not share our beliefs. What Ifs are one of many methods to do so without imposing on both sides positions.

Thats why its not useless.

(Side edit: Jesus and the Buddha used What Ifs and metaphors. Jesus didnt do it Just to hide his teachings from the pharasese. He also did so so that his disciples understood in a language they were familar with. Likewise, the Buddha's sutras Is metaphors and What Ifs. Throughout the sutras, he constantly used metaphors and stories and possed What Ifs so his disciples to think for themselves and understand his message.

I am sure the Quran uses metaphors for difficult context. Im sure Bahaullah did the same. Religion isnt to the point. What Ifs and metaphors are made just for this purpose: to discuss what we do not know)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Guys. Post 25 is for everyone

 

[viole]

​

Im keep rereading my OP and your post. Whyy post is so negative and then you smile? That, and explain why you say this:

"There is nothing inherently illogical, pointless or absurd to assume (alleged) counterfactual hypotheses and see where they lead. If they lead to an internal logical contradiction, you can mark them as false. If not, then they are live possibilities."

Either that or rephrase it.

The only reason it sounds illogical to me because people get defensive. If they explained why they dont like what ifs, Id understand and let it be.

What is wrong with What If questions?

If you do not care for the type of questions I ask, why answer? Skip the thread. Dont insult me.

Post 6 and 12 sums my opinion well.

I guess you misunderstood my post completely. Probably because of my poor English.

My whole point is that it is perfectly OK to ask "if" questions. Not only it is OK, it is very healthy. You can sometimes find new and deeper truths by asking them and check where they lead. Usually, people who refute to answer an IF question do not use logic (there is no law of logic that prevents studying the consequences of IF questions, even if the predicate involved is false), but are emotionally. afraid of the consequences. They are simply not free to think outside the box.

My main example in my previous post comes from mathematics. If mathematicians had thought like your Christian friends, namely that it is absurd to ask what would happen IF parallels can touch each others, because this IF is "obviously" false or "counterfactual", then we had never found non euclidean geometries and its applications to relativity.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thank you

If religion were like mathematics, then What If questions would be pointless just as the parallel question. Maybe that is what differs between some believers and some of the opposite. Some believers treat their beliefs like mathematics. Some people who differ, see beliefs as, well beliefs. When talking about the unknown, What Ifs (I agree) are healthy. The thing is, I get most answers from non-religious.

I am actually wondering from the religious or believers themselves, why they do not like What If questions and see if they can give examples of why or opinions without needing to defend themselves.

I guess you misunderstood my post completely. Probably because of my poor English.

My whole point is that it is perfectly OK to ask "if" questions. Not only it is OK, it is very healthy. You can sometimes find new and deeper truths by asking them and check where they lead. Usually, people who refute to answer an IF question do not use logic (there is no law of logic that prevents studying the consequences of IF questions, even if the predicate involved is false), but are emotionally. afraid of the consequences. They are simply not free to think outside the box.

My main example in my previous post comes from mathematics. If mathematicians had thought like your Christian friends, namely that it is absurd to ask what would happen IF parallels can touch each others, because this IF is "obviously" false or "counterfactual", then we had never found non euclidean geometries and its applications to relativity.

Ciao

- viole

Also, your English is better than mine and I'm an English teacher.

 

[viole]

Thank you

If religion were like mathematics, then What If questions would be pointless just as the parallel question. Maybe that is what differs between some believers and some of the opposite. Some believers treat their beliefs like mathematics. Some people who differ, see beliefs as, well beliefs. When talking about the unknown, What Ifs (I agree) are healthy. The thing is, I get most answers from non-religious.

We (mathematicians) ask if questions all the time. I would say all mathematical knowledge is the consequence of some ifs. We also use iffs, which means (if and only if).

At the risk of being superficial, I think that is why people who are always ready to study the consequences of ifs are called free thinkers. They do not have any constraints or red traffic light that blocks them, no matter how "threatening" those hypothesis, and the consequences thereof, might be.

I am actually wondering from the religious or believers themselves, why they do not like What If questions and see if they can give examples of why or opinions without needing to defend themselves.

It is an interesting question, for which I have no confident answer. Atheists are in general way too fast in pullng the "stupid" trigger. And most Christians I know are not stupid at all, and that includes my past Christian self, of course, lol.

My opinion is that strong religious belief might cause epistemological malfunction in some cognitive areas, but not all. At least that is what I think of my past self as a born again. For instance, the same people might have no problems to answer if questions that are counterfactual for everybody, for instance "what would you do if you could fly"?

On another forum I asked exactly this question and I was "surprised" to get a vald answer, while the same person refused to answer another "counterfactual" What If question afterwards concerning her belief.

Also, your English is better than mine and I'm an English teacher.

Very kind, but probably not totally sincere


Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I am serious:

My opinion is that strong religious belief might cause epistemological malfunction in some cognitive areas,

I honestly don't know about epistemological malfunction and anything of that nature. A lot of what you say and how you say it stumps me because I had brain surgery so my English is not right just native. Alot of students I speak with are surprised they know more Enlish than they thought. I tell them just conversing and being around people who speak the same language helps a lot. You'll (my students) speak like us English folks all the time: slanging our words, cuting off our letters, taking fast, and using the sound S in some ph words.

Very kind, but probably not totally sincere

 

[aoji]

Why are people afraid of What If ... there could be other paths to the truth ... questions?

Perhaps they are not mature in their beliefs. Once they know whether something is true or not then 'what if' questions are pointless.

If you ask me whether or not there could be other paths to truth - I answered in your dream last night.

And Pilate asked Jesus, "What is Truth?" And Jesus was Silence.