= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cousin_it comments on Welcome to Less Wrong! (2010-2011) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (796)
Hello.
I've only been checking this site for a short while and after reading all these interesting thoughts I posted something myself.
I'm interested in objective, rational thoughts about the ultimate reality of our existence (and Existence itself) and coming from a religious family - I also try to rationalize the notions I have about God.
I see that modal realism and Plantingas ontological argument don't go down well in here and I concur - by themselves they are underwhelmingly weak.
But what if You combine these two views, based one assumption alone - that Existence (whatever exactly it entails) has to be past eternal.
It's not an irrational belief - it's even possible by some theories. I posted something in that line (shouldn't be hard to find - there aren't many posts about God here) and I would very much appreciate any valid comments.
It's a simple theory, but I would very much appreciate some feedback. I have no idea if I'm talking rubbish or if it does make for a coherent logic.
Thanks in advance.
Saladin from Slovenia.
Yep, looks like rubbish. Sorry.
In general, looking to justify your existing beliefs doesn't work. Say this to yourself: "If God exists, I want to believe that God exists. If God doesn't exist, I want to believe that God doesn't exist."
Well, it's not that I believe in a Posthuman God - but I do believe in a past eternal universe (multiverse, Existence,..).
"Believing" just in that is IMO a rational belief (until proven otherwise, of course).
Past eternity neccesarily leads to a kind of modal realism - all possible worlds are (or have been) real worlds.
If there is a possible world that allows for a God (to evolve) - then it is neccesarily true.
So the only guestion left is "is there a possible universe where God (-like entity) can evolve"?
That's complicated - but I noted one oversimplified idea that "might" show such a possibility.
i'd like to discuss this in more detail.
Bad epistemology.
If a completely trustworthy person rolled a normal six-sided die, and told you the result is an even number - is it "rational" to believe that the result was 6 ? After all, it hasn't been proven otherwise. No, the ONLY rational belief in that situation is assigning an equal probability to 2, 4 and 6.
If you go around asking "am I allowed to believe this?" for things you want to believe, and "am I forced to believe this?" for things you don't, you're shooting yourself in the foot.
I cannot imagine what evidence you could have for such a belief.