Prayer and power

[I less than three logic]

I will grant that your lack of knowledge supports the proposition that you should not drive a bus.

I won't. Bri, what makes you think that a lack of knowledge about driving large vehicles is evidence that you should refrain from driving a bus? Why draw that conclusion? I suspect this conclusion is based on more than just your lack of knowledge.

 

[RandFan]

You say there is evidence, I say that the evidence is entirely speculative...

This assertion is false.

Life exists in our universe.
That life requires a planet, carbon, water, energy and other elements.
Based on what we know about our universe it would be perverse to assume that these things are not abundant throughout the universe.

This is not speculation. To say that the evidence is entirely speculative is to be willfully ignorant or obtuse.

 

[RandFan]

I won't. Bri, what makes you think that a lack of knowledge about driving large vehicles is evidence that you should refrain from driving a bus? Why draw that conclusion? I suspect this conclusion is based on more than just your lack of knowledge.

It's not definitive evidence. However if I hired Bri to drive my bus and she killed people then I could be negligent if I knew that she lacked the knowledge to drive a bus... I think.

 

[drkitten]

This one has really got me stumped. Incompatible but not formally contradictory?

There's nothing logically impossible about having a candy bar and losing weight at the same time; the two desires conflict, but are not irreconcilable. (For example, if your diet allowed you a candy bar tomorrow, you might decide to have it today instead. Or you might just decide to eat smaller portions at dinner.)

Ok, then please to answer the question. What do I want?

You want reading comprehension.

John actively desires to go to the fair.
John actively desires to keep his job.
If John goes to the fair he will lose his job.

What does John actively desire?

He actively desires to go to the fair, and he actively desires to keep his job. Again, they're incompatible, but not formally contradictory. Again, they can possibly be reconciled. Phone the boss and ask for an unscheduled personal day -- or perhaps fake bronchitis and hope he doesn't tip wise.

 

[Katana]

I didn't say that there wasn't evidence that prayer doesn't work. Certainly there have been studies that have shown that prayer doesn't work in some instances. What I said was that there is no evidence that prayer never works. Christians generally acknowledge that prayer doesn't always work, therefore in order to refute their belief you would have to provide evidence that prayer never works. Can you?

Do you have evidence that prayer ever works? If not, believing in the power of prayer simply because there is no evidence that it never works would be irrational.

 

[RandFan]

There's nothing logically impossible about having a candy bar and losing weight at the same time; the two desires conflict, but are not irreconcilable.

I'm not trying to demonstrate that the two desires are logically impossible. On the contrary, I'm trying to demonstrate that desire is not an absolute.

1.) I saw Mary go into the store. Either Mary went into the store or she didn't. Either I saw her or I didn't.

2.) I want to restrict calories enough to cause me to lose weight because my weight is causing a number of undesirable health problems AND I don't want to restrict calories enough to cause me to lose weight because doing so makes me miserable.

This is not simply a hypothetical BTW. It is how I truly feel. I struggle with it endlessly. My desire to lose weight causes me to restrict calories and exercise. This makes me miserable which causes me to want to increase calories and stop exercising. I vacillate between wants. Never completely wanting one to the exclusion of the other and at time not knowing what to do at all and sometimes indifferent to whatever happens.


You cannot say that desire is either one thing or the opposite because desire is not an absolute.

 

[I less than three logic]

It's not definitive evidence. However if I hired Bri to drive my bus and she killed people then I could be negligent if I knew that she lacked the knowledge to drive a bus... I think.

There is one reason. The danger posed to others. There's, also, the danger to yourself, to property, and a whole slew of things that we know can happen because of that lack of knowledge. These other reasons are supportable with evidence and/or logic. However, without these other reasons to draw that conclusion, the simple lack of knowledge on how to drive large vehicles means absolutely nothing at all.

We need those other reasons to know how to interpret the lack of knowledge. What evidence or logical reasons are there to interpret the lack of knowledge about the existence of God as God not wanting us to know about him as opposed to the much simpler interpretation that God just doesn't exist?

 

[RandFan]

There is one reason. The danger posed to others. There's, also, the danger to yourself, to property, and a whole slew of things that we know can happen because of that lack of knowledge. These other reasons are supportable with evidence and/or logic. However, without these other reasons to draw that conclusion, the simple lack of knowledge on how to drive large vehicles means absolutely nothing at all.

We need those other reasons to know how to interpret the lack of knowledge. What evidence or logical reasons are there to interpret the lack of knowledge about the existence of God as God not wanting us to know about him as opposed to the much simpler interpretation that God just doesn't exist?

Agreed.

 

[drkitten]

I'm not trying to demonstrate that the two desires are logically impossible. On the contrary, I'm trying to demonstrate that desire is not an absolute.

Well, you're completely failing at that.

Which is not surprising, but also irrelevant, because I already know that desire isn't an absolute. I also know that the Pittsburgh Steelers won the 2006 Superbowl -- and they're equally irrelevant to the question of whether the negation of "John wants X" implies that John has an active dislike to X -- or is even aware of X's existence.

If I walk into a crowded room and say "the pizza just arrived -- will everyone who wants some pizza please go out into the hall," some people will leave (the people who "want" pizza) and some people who won't. (those that don't). People who genuinely don't care, but aren't actively opposed to the pizza, will probably stay.

This is not simply a hypothetical BTW. It is how I truly feel. You cannot say that desire is one thing or the opposite because desire is not an absolute.

I not only can, but just did. The fact that it's not an absolute doesn't change the fact that "wanting X" has a logical opposite of "not wanting X," which in turn is distinguishable from "wanting not-X."

 

[RandFan]

If I walk into a crowded room and say "the pizza just arrived -- will everyone who wants some pizza please go out into the hall," some people will leave (the people who "want" pizza) and some people who won't. (those that don't). People who genuinely don't care, but aren't actively opposed to the pizza, will probably stay.

There is a council meeting tonight. At the end of the meeting we will discuss whether or not we should build a new stadium.

Those who want us to build the new football stadium go to room A.
Those who don't want us to build the new football stadium go to room B.
Those who don't care can go to room A, room B or, if you want, just go home.

Where do you think the people who genuinely don't care about the football stadium will go?

I not only can, but just did.

Sorry, no.

 

[RandFan]

Well, you're completely failing at that.

I don't know if you saw my other example. I have posted it twice but no one will comment on it. I will give it a go with you.

You ask Pete if he wants a candy bar and he says that he doesn't care. He says you can leave it on the desk in which case he will eat it or you can take it with you in which case he won't.

Does Pete want or not want the candy bar?

Which group does Pete fit in?

 

[Katana]

Where do you think the people who genuinely don't care about the football stadium will go?

The crapper?

Sorry. Thought I'd attempt to add some levity to the thread.

 

[Katana]

Which group does Pete fit in?

I am wondering the same.

 

[RandFan]

I am wondering the same.

You could argue that Pete does not actively desire the candy bar and therefore he doesn't want it. Of course you could also argue that Pete does not actively not desire it and therefore he does want it.

I'm dying for someone to answer the question. I wonder if anyone will.

But hey, I did get one response so that is something.

Thanks Katana.

 

[Bri]

Which you acknowledge was the belief that there was inteligent life in the universe, right? Let's stick to that.

No, I gave several examples that I felt countered the argument, of which belief in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe was one. But since we have a "tool" for discussing probabilities of intelligent life in the galaxy (one that you brought into the discussion, by the way) I'd like to discuss these examples: belief in intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy, or if you wish belief in communicating intelligent life in the galaxy. Do you think that one or both of these is an irrational belief?

No, I just think a much better argument can be made for the universe so if you don't mind let's put the goal posts back to where they were, ok?

The point here isn't to come up with the easiest example for you to defend against. Either of the above-mentioned beliefs are valid counter-examples to the argument that belief with little evidence is irrational. Do you think that one or both of those beliefs is irrational?

-Bri

 

[Bri]

I won't. Bri, what makes you think that a lack of knowledge about driving large vehicles is evidence that you should refrain from driving a bus? Why draw that conclusion? I suspect this conclusion is based on more than just your lack of knowledge.

Such as?

My lack of knowledge of how to drive a bus is certainly evidence that I shouldn't drive a bus. My lack of knowledge of neurology is evidence that I can't perform a successful brain operation. My lack of knowledge of jet propulsion is evidence that I can't build a rocket ship that can fly to Venus.

-Bri

 

[Bri]

This assertion is false.

Life exists in our universe.
That life requires a planet, carbon, water, energy and other elements.
Based on what we know about our universe it would be perverse to assume that these things are not abundant throughout the universe.

This is not speculation. To say that the evidence is entirely speculative is to be willfully ignorant or obtuse.

We know very little about the conditions necessary for intelligent life to emerge. Any values assigned to most of the variables of Drake's equation are speculation. From Wikipedia:

f_i, f_c and L, like f_l, are little more than guesses.

Is Wikipedia being willfully ignorant or obtuse?

-Bri

 

[Bri]

Do you have evidence that prayer ever works? If not, believing in the power of prayer simply because there is no evidence that it never works would be irrational.

No, I don't have evidence that prayer ever works. Nor is there evidence that prayer never works. As I've stated many times, there is little evidence for or against prayer working. Likewise, there is little evidence for or against the existence of [communicating] intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy.

-Bri

 

[RandFan]

No, I gave several examples that I felt countered the argument, of which belief in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe was one. But since we have a "tool" for discussing probabilities of intelligent life in the galaxy (one that you brought into the discussion, by the way) I'd like to discuss these examples: belief in intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy, or if you wish belief in communicating intelligent life in the galaxy.

Please feel free to use Drake's equation, but understand that we started with the Universe and there is nothing to keep us from using Drake's equation for the universe.

Do you think that one or both of these is an irrational belief?

Asked and answered Bri, if you are going to ignore my question then please stop asking.

The point here isn't to come up with the easiest example for you to defend against.

It's your argument. Do you reject your earlier argument?

 

[RandFan]

We know very little about the conditions necessary for intelligent life to emerge.

False. We know very much. I'm curious though, why are scientists interested in the study of the possibility of life on other planets but not the possibility that prayer works?

Any values assigned to most of the variables of Drake's equation are speculation.

Only the values are questioned and not the variables.

Is Wikipedia being willfully ignorant or obtuse?

No because Wikipedia doesn't claim that the evidence is speculative only the likely probability of those values. Huge difference.