= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Intrism comments on Open Thread, May 1-14, 2013 - 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 (648)
No, my understanding is that it's a fairly typical tactic.
Yes, I was indeed thinking of the Truman Show Delusion. My point, though, is that it shouldn't be any less credible than religion to you, meaning that you should be acting on that theory to a similar degree to religion.
Counterevidence for atheism is not impossible at all, as people have been saying up and down the thread. If the skies were to open up, and angels were to pour down out of the breach as the voice of God boomed over the landscape... that would most certainly be counterevidence for atheism. (Not conclusive counterevidence, mind. I might be insane, or it could be the work of hyperintelligent alien teenagers. But it would be more than enough evidence for me to convert.) And, in less dramatic terms, a simple well-designed and peer-reviewed study demonstrating the efficacy of prayer would be extremely helpful. There are even those miracles you've been talking about, although (again) most of us consider it poor evidence.
Sure, cornering your opponent in her arguments is a very common tactic, but it seems a bit silly to go telling me you've succeeded in it. In any case, I sure don't feel cornered. :)
See, I've got evidence for religion. What's my evidence for the Truman Show?
QED. Counterevidence, yes, but not any conclusive or good or rational counterevidence.
If you actually believed in the Truman Show hypothesis? Confirmation bias would provide a whole pile of evidence. Every time someone you know stutters, or someone stares at you from across the lunchroom, or the whole room goes quiet as you enter. Whenever there's been a car following you for more than three blocks, especially if it's a black SUV. Certain small things will happen by chance to support any theory. We'd argue that the same bias is likely responsible for most reports of miracles, by the way.
By "conclusive," I mean "assigning it probability of 1, not rounded or anything, just 1, there must be a god, case closed." But, rationalists don't believe that about any evidence, about anything. And we shouldn't, as you've been saying all this time about probability 0. The evidence I posited would, on the other hand, be extremely good rational evidence and I don't want to diminish that at all.
Downvoted for paraphrasing Intrism in a way that does not reflect what he actually said in your third quote.
What's your evidence for religion? It's one thing for you to claim that that your own estimate for the truth of your religion is high based on supposedly strong evidence that you refuse to share. It's quite another to expect anyone else to move their estimate.
I'm not expecting to convince you to move your estimate using my evidence—some of it is personal, and the rest would likely be rejected out of hand. No, that's just why I believe in religion rather than the Truman Show.
As for you, I think it's totally fine for you to rank the Truman Show as high as religion, given your rejection of practically all the evidence in favor of either. As long as you keep a real possibility for both.
I hope you do not feel bad because of some overzealous atheists here ganging up on you. This specific faucet of epistemic rationality is only a small part of the site. And kudos for being instrumentally rational and not letting yourself being bullied into discussing your specific evidence. This would certainly not be useful to anyone. Most people are good at compartmentalizing, and we don't have to be uniformly rational to benefit from bits and pieces here and there.
No, don't worry about my feelings. I wouldn't have "come out" immediately, or probably posted anything in the first place, if I wasn't sure I could survive it. I mean, yes, of course I feel like everyone's ganging up on me, but I could hardly expect them to do otherwise given the way I've been acting.
Thanks...I'm trying to be rational, I certainly am. And I'm delighted to find other people who are willing to think this way. You could never have this discussion where I'm from, except with someone who either is on this site or ought to be.
I'm sorry, it was a formatting error. Fixed it.