Is it reasonable to believe in God?

[historia]

Is it reasonable to believe in God?

Note, the question here is not whether you think it is true that God exists, but simply whether such a belief is reasonable or not.

[JoeyKnothead]

I also don't believe such as tooth fairies, Easter bunnies, and Santa Clausi exist.

Do you believe in fairy penguins Joey?

How do ya think we get gummy worms?

These fairy penguins live a few hours away from me. You're not allowed to feed them gummy worms.

Tasmania, right?

[brunumb]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #191]

Phillip Island, about an hour and a half southish of Melbourne, Victoria.

[AquinasForGod]

I have never heard a professional philosopher claim it is unreasonable to believe in God.


Something to consider is that the moral ontological argument has no defeater except trying to run it in reverse, that there is no necessary greatest being. So at best, this argument shows that we cannot prove and we CANNOT disprove God.

If we have reasons to believe in God and we cannot disprove God, then it sure seems reasonable to believe in God.

But it can also be reasonable to lack belief in God.

[TRANSPONDER]

I have never heard a professional philosopher claim it is unreasonable to believe in God.


Something to consider is that the moral ontological argument has no defeater except trying to run it in reverse, that there is no necessary greatest being. So at best, this argument shows that we cannot prove and we CANNOT disprove God.

If we have reasons to believe in God and we cannot disprove God, then it sure seems reasonable to believe in God.

But it can also be reasonable to lack belief in God.

Maybe you have spent too much time not listening. And I'm sorry, mate, but your attempt to play the 'sweet reasonable' card is not reasonable. Aside from you falling into the 'believe - or not' - trap, fallacy and general failure to even have the basic mindset to reason soundly, you strawman the matter.

We have discussed these 'reasons to believe in God' and there are none, historical, scientific, philosophical, moral or logical, that are good, valid reasons to believe in any god, let alone a particular one. Your ontology fails because, we have a 'greater being' that we can imagine that did everything. Call it nature, reality or physics, there is no reasonable reason to suppose it has intelligence. "If you can't disprove it, it must be at least 'reasonable' to believe in it" and the soupy faux -generous, "It's reasonable for you not to of course." are inverted logic, which is faithbased,not on valid reason.

No, the bottom line is that natural physics is the way we know things work and no spoor of God has been validated. Thus there is no good Reason to postulate an intelligence doing anything, other than ours. The burden of proof falls on the God - claimant all the time and that you and the Theist professors fail to understand this and think it is reasonable to put it down to matters of belief rather than evidence and logic (there is no good evidence and logic says, don't believe until there is) and no matter how many certificates they can wag about, they are not doing a reasonable apologetic until they understand that.

The evidence and logic is no good reason to believe, as yet and the various apologetics to wangle a god into credibility are cheats, including the 'my beliefs are as good as yours' swindle of pretended even - handedness (1). No, the logic is either correct or it is not and it is not 'let's agree it's half correct'. "Sweet reasonable" is just another god - apologetic cheat. Like the one about wagging university credentials to try to pass off faith - claims as valid.

(1) the refutation of this sort of play (Let's call it Splonder's fallacy ) "You say the sun rises in the east and I say it rises in the west. Let's be reasonable and agree it rises in the middle'. No, it is unreasonable to compromise on what is factually true or not. Quite apart that, for a god -claimant a 'draw' is a win.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #194]

You are objectively wrong. Who are the great minds that can tell us if something is reasonable or not? Logicians perhaps? Philosophers? Some dude on debatingchristianty?

The first two, yes, the later, no way. So how about you do this if you wish to be taken seriously? Show a logician or philosopher that explains why believing in God cannot be reasonable. I will wait.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #194]

You are objectively wrong. Who are the great minds that can tell us if something is reasonable or not? Logicians perhaps? Philosophers? Some dude on debatingchristianty?

The first two, yes, the later, no way. So how about you do this if you wish to be taken seriously? Show a logician or philosopher that explains why believing in God cannot be reasonable. I will wait.

Lomfpoc

It was you, some dude on debatingchristianity, who said it was reasonable to believe in God.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #194]

You are objectively wrong. Who are the great minds that can tell us if something is reasonable or not? Logicians perhaps? Philosophers? Some dude on debatingchristianty?

The first two, yes, the later, no way. So how about you do this if you wish to be taken seriously? Show a logician or philosopher that explains why believing in God cannot be reasonable. I will wait.

Lomfpoc

It was you, some dude on debatingchristianity, who said it was reasonable to believe in God.

Except, I go with what the philosophers say, such as the agnostic Joseph Schmid who says it can be reasonable to believe in God. It depends on the reasons of course.

I only hear it is unreasonable from a few people on forums like this.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #194]

You are objectively wrong. Who are the great minds that can tell us if something is reasonable or not? Logicians perhaps? Philosophers? Some dude on debatingchristianty?

The first two, yes, the later, no way. So how about you do this if you wish to be taken seriously? Show a logician or philosopher that explains why believing in God cannot be reasonable. I will wait.

Lomfpoc

It was you, some dude on debatingchristianity, who said it was reasonable to believe in God.

Except, I go with what the philosophers say, such as the agnostic Joseph Schmid who says it can be reasonable to believe in God. It depends on the reasons of course.

I only hear it is unreasonable from a few people on forums like this.

Yet you bemoan 'dudes' on debatingchristianity declaring what's reasonable, as you declare what's reasonable.

Theists say the darndest things.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #194]

You are objectively wrong. Who are the great minds that can tell us if something is reasonable or not? Logicians perhaps? Philosophers? Some dude on debatingchristianty?

The first two, yes, the later, no way. So how about you do this if you wish to be taken seriously? Show a logician or philosopher that explains why believing in God cannot be reasonable. I will wait.

Lomfpoc

It was you, some dude on debatingchristianity, who said it was reasonable to believe in God.

Except, I go with what the philosophers say, such as the agnostic Joseph Schmid who says it can be reasonable to believe in God. It depends on the reasons of course.

I only hear it is unreasonable from a few people on forums like this.

Yet you bemoan 'dudes' on debatingchristianity declaring what's reasonable, as you declare what's reasonable.

Theists say the darndest things.

Again, you miss the point. I am not sharing my opinion as some lone wolf. I am sharing the opinion of those that know better.

[brunumb]

If we have reasons to believe in God and we cannot disprove God, then it sure seems reasonable to believe in God.

Just a follow up to that, can you please suggest how one would disprove the non-existent.