Why do you believe?

[Riverwolf]

Rapid brain fluctuation, which there are many explainable causes.

One certain cause of effects does not negate the existence of other such causes replicating the same effect.

 

[jmn]

One certain cause of effects does not negate the existence of other such causes replicating the same effect.

The causes are a byproduct of original cause.

 

[Riverwolf]

The causes are a byproduct of original cause.

...excuse me?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Rapid brain fluctuations, and there are many explainable causes.

I'll admit that's a possible explanation, but that isn't how I choose to see it.

That still doesn't explain the weird stuff with my statues and shrine implements.

 

[jmn]

Brain fluctuation first, followed by what is experienced.

 

[Riverwolf]

Brain fluctuation first, followed by what is experienced.

Ah, thanks.

But, those experiences could have been caused by something other than brain fluctuations. That's what I was getting at.

 

[jmn]

Ah, thanks.

But, those experiences could have been caused by something other than brain fluctuations. That's what I was getting at.

I would say no.

 

[jmn]

I'll admit that's a possible explanation, but that isn't how I choose to see it.

That still doesn't explain the weird stuff with my statues and shrine implements.

Sorry, but it explains everything.

 

[Riverwolf]

I would say no.

And such a statement is technically a logical fallacy.

Just because you've never seen it, and just because it's not yet been demonstrated, doesn't automatically mean it doesn't exist. The same is true for science.

Unless something is coming under an actual check, and the results of the check are irrefutably conclusive, the default stance is N/A, neither yay nor nay.

 

[jmn]

but that isn't how I choose to see it.
That still doesn't explain the weird stuff with my statues and shrine implements.

Keyword is choose here.

 

[jmn]

Just because you've never seen it, and just because it's not yet been demonstrated, doesn't automatically mean it doesn't exist.

never been seen or demonstrated

 

[Riverwolf]

never been seen or demonstrated

Just like the heliocentricity of the solar system until Copernicus.

 

[jmn]

No, nothing like that. Are you serious!?

Hardly comparable

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Sorry, but it explains everything.

How does it explain everything to totally disregard part of my presented proofs?

My statues have done weird things. Can you address that?

 

[Riverwolf]

no nothing like that. Are you serious?!

Yup.

When something has not been seen or demonstrated, the conversation stops at "it's never been seen or demonstrated." It is logically fallacious to go further and say "it must therefore be nonexistent."

 

[jmn]

How does it explain everything to totally disregard part of my presented proofs?

Its your in your mind.

My statues have done weird things. Can you address that?

I have

I'll admit that's a possible explanation, but that isn't how I choose to see it.

You choose despite evidence

 

[Thief]

Why do you believe in what you believe?

Science!

 

[jmn]

Yup.
When something has not been seen or demonstrated, the conversation stops at "it's never been seen or demonstrated." It is logically fallacious to go further and say "it must therefore be nonexistent."

Nothing fallacious about delirium and hallucinations.

 

[StarryNightshade]

Other: I believe what I believe for the exact same reason any human believes what they believe. It's consistent with my past experiences and knowledge. And, the beliefs serve me well. They do not cause cognitive dissonance or incentive to change.

Agree 100%

Nothing fallacious about delirium and hallucinations.

To say that others beliefs (which are different from your own) are delirious is, in and of itself, a fallacy.

"Oh, you don't believe what I believe? Then you are delusional. Case closed. I win!"

 

[Riverwolf]

Nothing fallacious about delirium and hallucinations.

What's fallacious is in saying that those are the only possible explanations, simply because you've never seen any others.