Can the probability of God existence change?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not put a degree of certainty on god? This can then give us a way of classifying a person's belief or disbelief in god. The "Agnostic Factor" is a great way to determine how religious or unreligious a person is. The online dating implications alone give it a justification for use. I mean, if you meet a girl online who says that she's blonde 5'10'' , 120 pounds and religious, then what the heck does the last part mean? Does it mean that she's a good person who happens to wear a cross around her neck? Or are you going to wake up one night to find that she's performing an exorcism on you screaming "the power of Christ compells you"? Wouldn't it be easier to meet her and have her say "I'm blond, 6ft tall, 120 pounds, I like long walks on the beach, and I feel that there is a 1/10 chance of god existing". Now you know who you're talking to and what you can expect from the person. It's late and I've been drinking, so maybe this is incoherent rambling, but it seems like a good idea. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It may be a great way of determining how religous someone is, in fact that sounds entirely reasonable. It doesn't mean that their degree of belief is anything to do with the probability of god existing.

Compare with the flush example. The degree of belief in flushyness should be exactly the same as the probability of making the flush.

chez

[ QUOTE ]
The degree of belief in flushyness should be exactly the same as the probability of making the flush.


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? I don't think I agree with you in your comparison of drawing for a flush to guessing if god exists, but I may just be misinterpreting what you mean.

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The degree of belief in flushyness should be exactly the same as the probability of making the flush.


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? I don't think I agree with you in your comparison of drawing for a flush to guessing if god exists, but I may just be misinterpreting what you mean.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is probably not you, chez has a habit of making things complicated. I didn’t get a chance to help him edit his post for clarity.

Actually, I haven’t read his post yet. (I am just joking with my pal, chez.) I am sure it is fine, but he I am sure he will be glad to restate it.

RJT

[andyfox]

Those who believe in God (capital G) beleive that we are his special creations, while not physically at the center of the universe, at the center of God's thoughts. Were it proved that there is no other life in the universe, wouldn't it lend credence to that view and detract from the viewpoint that life was formed from physical phenomena, rather than from the design of a Grand Designer?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Those who believe in God (capital G) beleive that we are his special creations

[/ QUOTE ]

I think thats the issue. Not all people who believe in god believe that.

Some people who don't believe in god don't believe that belief in god means belief that we are his special creations.

I don't believe it can be put clearer than that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

chez

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The degree of belief in flushyness should be exactly the same as the probability of making the flush.


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? I don't think I agree with you in your comparison of drawing for a flush to guessing if god exists, but I may just be misinterpreting what you mean.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it make sense if by god I don't mean religous view. I can't help distinguishing the two even though I get accused of making things too complex.

chez

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe it can be put clearer than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I am out of a job, then. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Well, I consider it a compliment, chez. Glad to see you passed the final exam. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[RJT]

OMG, this is scary. I thought David was gone for a while. It seems he has indeed resurrected.* And in only 2 days instead of the usual 3. I guess if one has to follow a good act, one better do it a bit better. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Cf My post under the thread “4 possibilities of the universe…”

[Jeff V]

[ QUOTE ]
Some things shouldn't be given a probability based on the absurdity of the content

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you ever get tired of using responses like this?

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
Re: Can the probability of God existence change?

[/ QUOTE ]

Have a thought provoking chat with someone about religion, and the probability of God existing could easily increase or decrease a hundred fold.

[ QUOTE ]
What if it could somehow be proven with 100% certainty that we were the only intelligent life in the universe.

[/ QUOTE ]

Erhm! How? Will the universe last long enough for you to inspect every planet, By the time you have checked the last planet, life will have had millions of years to evolve on one of the first few you visited. You would have to actually visit them, just looking will only tell you what the situation was when the light left them.

Just imagine after trillions of plants you think you have nearly finished your quest, only to have, to your horror, someone point out that you have personally infected billions and billions of planets with bacterial life, and now the universe is seething with the stuff [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]