You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Epictetus comments on Theological Epistemology - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: Bound_up 04 May 2015 10:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (16)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Epictetus 06 May 2015 06:34:27PM 1 point [-]

How does a theist distinguish by any imaginable experience between an omnipotent and loving Being, and an omnipotent Being that just wants you to believe it is loving?

How do you distinguish between a loving person and an actor who wants to appear loving? Well, you wait for the actor to trip up. If the actor is exceptionally good, you'll probably have to wait a long time. If the actor is infinitely good, you can't tell the difference.

Comment author: Jiro 07 May 2015 03:55:09PM *  0 points [-]

If you just have some kind of preference that the actor (or god) has a particular mental state, then a loving God could act like a non-loving God, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. It would make no practical difference to you beyond your preference for the entity's invisible mental state.

But asking "how could we tell if God is really loving?" may not mean that. You're not being asked to distinguish between "loving God" and "God that acts loving". Rather, you're being asked to distinguish between "loving God" and "God that doesn't act loving, but is called loving". The two would act in different ways, so the question of good acting doesn't come up.

In other words, if someone claims 'this is the type of thing that would be done by a loving God', how do you determine whether that claim is correct? If someone tells you that God gives people cancer out of love, can you respond "a truly loving God wouldn't give people cancer"?