Would you change if...?

[kaisersose]

A hypothetical to Theists -

If you received irrefutable proof that ,

There is no God
Natue exists on its own
No reason behind children born with defective hearts
No reason why one person sails through a life of prosperity while another is laden with numerous problems
No after-life
No future lives
No heaven and
No hell.

If you received this information today, would you make any changes to your lifestyle?

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

A hypothetical to Theists -

If you received irrefutable proof that ,

There is no God
Natue exists on its own
No reason behind children born with defective hearts
No reason why one person sails through a life of prosperity while another is laden with numerous problems
No after-life
No future lives
No heaven and
No hell.

If you received this information today, would you make any changes to your lifestyle?

The question rests on such an absurd premise, it doesn't even deserve a response, save one that points out that absurdity. Do you really think you're going to turn heads?

 

[Storm]

A hypothetical to Theists -

If you received irrefutable proof that ,

There is no God
Natue exists on its own
No reason behind children born with defective hearts
No reason why one person sails through a life of prosperity while another is laden with numerous problems
No after-life
No future lives
No heaven and
No hell.

If you received this information today, would you make any changes to your lifestyle?

Well, I'm not a theist, properly speaking, so much of this doesn't apply, but I wouldn't change anything.

 

[Madhuri]

Actually I think it's an ok question.

I probably would change to some extent. My motivations, life plans would shift a little. I'd be less happy too and that would affect my behaviour and health.

But I don't think that I would be a less caring or loving person. I'd still have the same morals.

 

[Riverwolf]

A hypothetical to Theists -

If you received irrefutable proof that ,

There is no God
Natue exists on its own
No reason behind children born with defective hearts
No reason why one person sails through a life of prosperity while another is laden with numerous problems
No after-life
No future lives
No heaven and
No hell.

If you received this information today, would you make any changes to your lifestyle?

Don't really know. The only one of those that affects my life is God, and that's an agnostic belief. The others aren't really that important to my life. So, I guess my life wouldn't be all that different.

 

[ChristineES]

Hypothetical questions are really interesting, but impossible to answer. We can say what we could do, but we really don't know what would happen until it actually happens.

I am going to perfectly honest, I haven't the slightest idea if I would change anything.

 

[Penumbra]

The question rests on such an absurd premise, it doesn't even deserve a response, save one that points out that absurdity. Do you really think you're going to turn heads?

Does your own answer to the perfectly reasonable question frighten you?

 

[Irelandrulz2]

Well the only thing I can think of immediately to change would be to stop debating that religion is real, if I found out it was fake.
Of course this hasn't happened so it's really hard to determine what I would do.

 

[smokydot]

A hypothetical to Theists -
If you received irrefutable proof that ,
There is no God
Natue exists on its own
No reason behind children born with defective hearts
No reason why one person sails through a life of prosperity while another is laden with numerous problems
No after-life
No future lives
No heaven and
No hell.
If you received this information today, would you make any changes to your lifestyle?

According to the Scriptures which I believe, any such "irrefutable proof" is a deception and a lie, which I am to have nothing to do with.

And that's what I would do in the face of such "irrefutable proof."

 

[linwood]

According to the Scriptures which I believe, any such "irrefutable proof" is a deception and a lie, which I am to have nothing to do with.

And that's what I would do in the face of such "irrefutable proof."

This is why I`m scared of theists.
:areyoucra:

 

[Madhuri]

This is why I`m scared of theists.
:areyoucra:

I've also had atheists admit that there is not a single situation that would make them believe in God. No matter how 'irrefutable'.

 

[smokydot]

This is why I`m scared of theists.
:areyoucra:

You are assuming, and this is all it is--an assumption, that your view is true and mine is not. Since it is only an assumption, that allows for my assumption possibly to be true.

And if it is, my assumption that the Scriptures are the Word of (the one and only) God, written, then any "irrefutable proof" really is a deception and a lie.
It's not like that hasn't happened before.

 

[Storm]

Reflecting on this further, I wondered if I would lose my passion for religion. With Christine's caveat firmly in mind, I really don't think I would. I've always been of the opinion that religion tells us more of ourselves than God, and I think that would continue to fascinate me. Even if my passion had no more bearing on the modern world than a doctorate in Latin's.

 

[Penumbra]

You are assuming, and this is all it is--an assumption, that your view is true and mine is not. Since it is only an assumption, that allows for my assumption possibly to be true.

And if it is, my assumption that the Scriptures are the Word of (the one and only) God, written, then any "irrefutable proof" really is a deception and a lie.
It's not like that hasn't happened before.

Not really.

Apparently you have a conclusion in mind, and the information doesn't matter. The OP seems to assume people actually make conclusions based on the available information.

So if people make conclusions based on all of the information available to them, and in this hypothetical situation all of the information refutes the existence of god, then his question is valid.

 

[Penumbra]

Reflecting on this further, I wondered if I would lose my passion for religion. With Christine's caveat firmly in mind, I really don't think I would. I've always been of the opinion that religion tells us more of ourselves than God, and I think that would continue to fascinate me. Even if my passion had no more bearing on the modern world than a doctorate in Latin's.

I agree that religion tells a lot about the people that hold a given religious belief. Understanding someone's religion is a shortcut into understanding their deepest desires, fears, and morality.

That's why even as someone who isn't religious, religion fascinates me.

 

[Riverwolf]

According to the Scriptures which I believe, any such "irrefutable proof" is a deception and a lie, which I am to have nothing to do with.

And that's what I would do in the face of such "irrefutable proof."

Uh... irrefutable proof would mean there's absolutely no valid argument that can be made against it.

In other words, it would be as factual as most humans have five fingers on their hands.

 

[smokydot]

Uh... irrefutable proof would mean there's absolutely no valid argument that can be made against it.
In other words, it would be as factual as most humans have five fingers on their hands.

Do you think that means it can't possibly be deception?

 

[Erebus]

I probably wouldn't change much if anything in my day to day life since my practices aren't contingent on a deity literally existing

Do you think that means it can't possibly be deception?

I think the OP was implying that yes. Remember this is a hypothetical argument that involves you knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that god is not real etc.

 

[Riverwolf]

Do you think that means it can't possibly be deception?

Yes. No possibility of deception whatsoever.

 

[smokydot]

Not really.
Apparently you have a conclusion in mind, and the information doesn't matter. The OP seems to assume people actually make conclusions based on the available information.
So if people make conclusions based on all of the information available to them, and in this hypothetical situation all of the information refutes the existence of god, then his question is valid.

His question is quite valid.

And so is my claim to information he doesn't have, based on a premise he does not acknowledge, which shows the "irrefutable proof" to be deception.