iano writes:
Can one henceforth say "I know God exists" without:
a) that being an illogical thing to say?
b) having to prove it to anyone (for we have seen it is possible to know things whilst not being able to prove them)?
c) being of necessity considered delusional?
Iano,
You seem to be skirting round the point and re-defining the topic here.
You claim to be 100% certain, to know, that God exists. You consider yourself a '1'. Yet you accept the fact that you could be deluded, you accept that you 'could' be wrong.
Your knowledge of God is a subset of your conciousness, your knowledge of existance. your knowledge of God is contained within your 'reality'
Therefore if you can express or accept the tiniest piece of doubt on your reality (i.e. accept that you 'might' be deluded), you cannot be 100% certain that you know God exists.
for instance. If I were to say "I am 100% certain that this computer screen exists" but follow that with "Of course I could be deluded"
that immediately reduces the 100% certainty to less than 100%. The fact that I accept that my reality may be an illusion, means that every thing contained therein may also be an illusion.
You position as a 1 is as untenable as a 7. It seems to me that this was the point that Dawkins was trying to make.
in point (c) above:
being of necessity considered delusional?
you are making the condition that if youare not delusional, then what you know is true. i.e. "if I am not mistaken, then I am right"
a fairly pointless statement no?
the fact is you may well be delusional, and as long as that possibility exists, you cannot be 100% certain of ANYTHING.
™ Version 4.2
