|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Great religious falsehoods | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5750 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
The problem with trying to scientifically test God is that a scientific claim needs to be falsifiable in order to be science.
If there wasn't an omnipotent God, what would we expect to see in our Universe? How would we know the difference from a universe with an omnipotent God? How can we test this? I don't think that you can come up with good testable, falsifiable predictions about an omnipotent being - as He could get around any test! This is why God cannot be scientifically tested.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
Hello iano,
I would like to respond to several points in your post, but I am striving to kept things as simple as I can.
jag writes:
The result: there is no evidence that there is any god like entity imposing any effect upon this world or universe.
iano writes:
No evidence acceptable to Science you can only mean.
Can you provide any substantial evidence in support of a god that exists and is causing any effect upon this world? Let us not get into a debate about the definition of substantial evidence. That is often just a method of dodging the question. Post what you think is substantial. State an effect you have seen and state what you think caused the effect, the originating agent. Then provide your statement of evidence showing that the agent was indeed the cause of the effect. In other words, what did god do, and why do you think he did it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
Hello Alasdair
Alasdair writes: The problem with trying to scientifically test God is that a scientific claim needs to be falsifiable in order to be science. We are in agreement. I think that part of the problem is that due to the very nature of the discussion we very often are dealing with people who are not interested in any nonsense about falsifiable conclusions. One of my current concepts is that we must put the questions in terms they are more likely to listen to and think about. This is something I am not good at. But we only get better at what we practice. I am striving for clear simple posts with as few points as possible. If we keep the battlefield clear of all but one obstruction, we can concentration on that one item at a time. I am certainly open to other’s opinion on this type of conversation. God can be tested. Declare what god can do, and see if we can determine if god really did it. Example: prayer. Very testable. Always fails.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5750 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
That wouldn't be testing God though, would it? It would be testing properties of God that even then deal with abstract concepts (maybe the prayer failing is because God felt they didn't deserve healing, etc).
By definition an omnipotent being can do anything - this means you cannot falsify Him, because He always has a way around the test! Therefore God is unfalsifiable, and is completely outside the realm of science. (Along with fairies and unicorns of course.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
alasdair writes: Therefore God is unfalsifiable, and is completely outside the realm of science. You claim god is outside the realm of science. That is the whole point here. You have absolutely no justiciation to make that claim! None what so ever! If you think you do, show it. Just to pre-empt and argument: The bible is nothing but words on paper. It is not evidence of anything at all. It is evidence only that it was written, and that is has been copied over and over with a huge number of mistakes. Indeed, biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman wrote in his book "Misquoting Jesus" that there are more errors in the various copies of the new testemant than were are words in it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5750 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
God is not falsifiable. You cannot prove God wrong. This means that God is untestable. This means that God is completely 100% outside the realm of science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
alasdair writes: (maybe the prayer failing is because God felt they didn't deserve healing, etc). Do you have any example of documented or verifiable instances where prayer was shown to heal anyone? There have been numerous tests, and all fail. That says that god never decides anyone should be healed. Indeed, if god exists, then god caused us to need healing in the first place. Nice guy. (Just in case, read that with extreme sarcasm. Why did he create us so that we need healing. As he knows everything, that must have been an intentional act on his part.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
You failed to provide your justification. How do you justify that statement. You claim it, you prove it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5750 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
Which statement of these two of mine do you disagree with:
1) As an omnipotent being, God can get around every test, and is therefore unfalsifiable - you cannot prove he doesn't exist. 2) Falsifiability is a requirement for testability which is a requirement for scientific inquiry.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
alasdair writes: 1) As an omnipotent being, God can get around every test, and is therefore unfalsifiable - you cannot prove he doesn't exist. I don't see any cause to believe that there is any supernatural being that you call god. Much less that he is omnipotent, omsiescent, etc. Now what so ever. You claim it, you show it.
Falsifiability is a requirement for testability which is a requirement for scientific inquiry. I agree with that. You cannot form a testable statement about god that is falsifiable. If you do form one, it will be falsified.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2478 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Alasdair writes: As an omnipotent being, God can get around every test, and is therefore unfalsifiable - you cannot prove he doesn't exist. How can you know he's omnipotent? Where's your evidence for this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5750 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
I don't see any cause to believe that there is any supernatural being that you call god. Much less that he is omnipotent, omsiescent, etc. Now what so ever. You claim it, you show it. Nor do I. I'm an atheist. That has nothing to do with it. However, the claim "There exists an omnipotent being, called God" is ultimately unfalsifiable. As He would be omnipotent, He can get around any sort of test one could attempt to impose. You can't put something omnipotent in a box and try and test it. Therefore, as the claim that an omnipotent being exists is unfalsifiable, it is completely unscientific - outside of the realm of science completely, along with astrology and fairies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jag Member (Idle past 5754 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
Nor do I. I'm an atheist. That has nothing to do with it. Well, you did fool me.
You can't put something omnipotent in a box and try and test it. The point about omnipotent is that there is no such thing as anything that is or can be omnipotent. If anyone suspects so, then provide the evidence. First, show that it exists. Then show that it cannot be tested. And yes, it can be tested. All of Christianity (and other religions) believe in prayer. There has never been a successful test of prayer. Indeed, every prayer asking for anything is a test. They all fail. The claim that it cannot be tested due of omnipotent is useless until there can be something shown to be omnipotent. One might say it’s a circular. If so, the claimant must overcome that hurdle. Not the challenger. Its not our problem, it is theirs. Why are we debating? The point of this thread is to present a false position and ask how we can deal with it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2478 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Alasdair writes: However, the claim "There exists an omnipotent being, called God" is ultimately unfalsifiable. As He would be omnipotent, He can get around any sort of test one could attempt to impose. You can't put something omnipotent in a box and try and test it. That's the conventional way of looking at it, and I understand what you mean, but try this. The claim has to come from somewhere. So, we have an evidenceless claim emerging from the human mind/brain of a theist. Now, we are dealing with something that science can examine, something concrete. So, we can examine the God via the source of the claim. This way, if the proposed God is an objective reality, then your way of thinking might apply, but if it is a subjective delusion, the other obvious possibility/probability, then we could well identify characteristics that could be used as evidence against the existence of the proposed God. The word "proof" is a difficult one, but when there's no evidence for the existence of the proposed God, and good evidence against it, then perhaps the word proof could be used. So, having effectively disproved the God of one nutty theist, we move on to the next.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
The primary reason I believe it is false: Any thing (energy, matter, entity, etc) that causes an effect can be tested. Any action by a supposed god can and should be tested. The result: there is no evidence that there is any god like entity imposing any effect upon this world or universe. True, in the sense of empirical testing. Perhaps it is this way intentionally. And then you do seem to present a false dichotomy here: the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. There being no cure for AIDS doesn't negate the possibility for one, even though it is not observed. “I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024