The 2024 VT Belief/Non-belief Poll

[Marka Ragnos]

10 hours ago, fruitvilla said:

The problem with Pascal's wager is that he puts zero negative value on living a lie. Also, if we wish to take Pascal, hook, line and sinker, we would likely choose to be Catholics. In my personal experience, I don't choose to believe stuff; more that I grow into beliefs or wake up one morning finding myself holding a position, I might not have admitted to the day before.

Have you read any Joseph Campbell?

Yes, but it's been ages, tbh. You are in fact dealing with RC in me, although not a very diligent one, sort of at times in the Graham Greene "Catholic agnostic" mould.  

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

The bigger problem with Pascal's wager is... Which god?

Even if we knew there was some god, you're most likely to end up pissing them off by devoting your life to the wrong one.

He considers this in his original text and disregards it based on little more than cultural arrogance.

It's a very weak argument that really doesn't deserve to live on for centuries.

I don't think it really has, except among a few weirdos. I see Pascal's decision theory as a form of probability theory or something like that, but it's only nominally similar to my own thing. My wife tells me that I should re-read Kierkegaard (again, it's been a few years) and I would find a home. She assures me that -- in terms of my thinking -- I'm not very special at all. 

It's so interesting to read about people's thinking about non-belief and belief. I really enjoy this stuff.

Edited March 1 by Marka Ragnos

[mjmooney]

Why is  'superstition' always categorised differently from 'religion'? 

Religion IS superstition. 

 

[UpTheVilla26]

God is a fairy tale that unfortunately millions and millions of people have somehow believed in. Countless people have also lost their life's due to this belief and ended up involved in stupid cults ran by nothing but idiots creaming in money from the donuts who they can brainwash. 

You're telling me, that in the history of everything ever, there was 1 dude who managed to create everything we know? Why hasn't anyone else since been able to do this if it's possible and how did 'god' exist if he created everything?! The bible is literally the biggest fantasy story you could wish to read, donnies building arks, parting seas etc... 

I'd like to believe there is an afterlife as I'd love nothing more to be with my family and loved ones once this life is over but again, the notion is borderline ridiculous.  

I do belive that there is a far superior race to us somewhere out in the universe and I believe they somehow see and know what us 'humans' do. That'll seem as far fetched to some as believing in God though and is a totally different conversation. 

 

[Wainy316]

43 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Why is  'superstition' always categorised differently from 'religion'? 

Religion IS superstition. 

 

But superstition is not always religion.

I'm completley irreligious but I still think if if I brush my left hand against something without then brushing my right hand against it I will be struck down on the spot.

And if I have the TV volume volume on 13 then I will absolutely, definitely spontaneously combust.

[colhint]

I think religion has been useful. Whichever book you read in the main wanted the individual to be generally a good person. And the quickest way to spread this was through religion. Now I know there have been countless wars, but that's over the different types of religion rather than the message in the book. I could liken it a bit to Microsoft. It probably wasn't the best but 40 to 50 years ago we all learned the basics of operating a computer pretty much the same way. 

I would also bet for every bad vicar,priest, imam or rabbai, there would be 100 good peace loving ones.

I'm atheist just so people don't think there's any angle.

Edited March 1 by colhint

[chrisp65]

Anybody that thinks removing religion would reduce conflict and death is either lying to us or lying to themselves.

Remove religion and we’ll war over gold, wheat, water, red or blue bandanas, curly hair, modern jazz, and oil reserves.

 

[fruitvilla]

3 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

You are in fact dealing with RC in me

The thing I don't get in this day and age is the belief that an angel came to a woman called Maryam (Mary) and foretold of some kind of divine birth, possibly parthenogenic. This belief is mostly true for two of the major Abrahamic religions, Islam and Christianity. I don't have the skill set required to hold this belief.

[fruitvilla]

47 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Anybody that thinks removing religion would reduce conflict and death is either lying to us or lying to themselves.

Possibly true, but it is difficult to reconcile philosophical agnostics starting wars. We're not sure but let's start a war anyway?

[fruitvilla]

5 hours ago, Davkaus said:

The bigger problem with Pascal's wager is... Which god?

Pascal anticipated this question. We are told he did an extensive study of various religions and came to the conclusion Catholicism was the best bet. By an amazing coincidence, this was the religion of which he was already a member. 

But I do wonder how Pascal would have modified his wager in light of the Bayes theorem which was published a hundred years or so later.

[chrisp65]

25 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Possibly true, but it is difficult to reconcile philosophical agnostics starting wars. We're not sure but let's start a war anyway?

Put a philosophical agnostic in charge of a people neighbouring another people that have the water or the gold and see if that stacks up.

[fruitvilla]

5 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Put a philosophical agnostic in charge of a people neighbouring another people that have the water or the gold and see if that stacks up.

Well if we are talking of hypotheticals ... sell them equipment/technology for digging up the gold and canalization of the water ... in exchange for some of that water.

The more interesting question would be what would happen if the nation with gold and water were inclined to philosophical agnosticism?

[chrisp65]

5 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Well if we are talking of hypotheticals ... sell them equipment/technology for digging up the gold and canalization of the water ... in exchange for some of that water.

The more interesting question would be what would happen if the nation with gold and water were inclined to philosophical agnosticism?

I think we’ve seen more than enough examples of vast industrial scaled killing by the not particularly religiously driven to know how all the scenarios could play out. 

[fruitvilla]

4 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I think we’ve seen more than enough examples of vast industrial scaled killing by the not particularly religiously driven to know how all the scenarios could play out. 

True ... but not my point.

[Marka Ragnos]

1 hour ago, fruitvilla said:

The thing I don't get in this day and age is the belief that an angel came to a woman called Maryam (Mary) and foretold of some kind of divine birth, possibly parthenogenic. This belief is mostly true for two of the major Abrahamic religions, Islam and Christianity. I don't have the skill set required to hold this belief.

I’m the last person who would have an answer for you on that one. But I can certainly understand your skepticism and perplexity. The fact that you would even care about the authenticity of such a story is to me quite cool. I find I don’t take the big “miracles” seriously, nor the underlying themes of my beliefs lightly. I’m pretty sure if an angel visited me, I would be heading over to the nearest psychiatric hospital shortly afterwards . 

[fruitvilla]

14 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

The fact that you would even care about the authenticity of such a story

I don't particularly care about the authenticity of the story. I don't think it is authentic. I do wonder how people might come to such a belief though. But this 'story' is a core belief of mainline Christianity. This of course includes Catholicism.  So, if one does not believe in this story then the bits that follow including the crucifixion and salvation make little sense. 

So without this particular belief in this "big miracle" then I don't find the whole thing particularly coherent.

[mjmooney]

5 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Anybody that thinks removing religion would reduce conflict and death is either lying to us or lying to themselves.

Remove religion and we’ll war over gold, wheat, water, red or blue bandanas, curly hair, modern jazz, and oil reserves.

But at least that would be honest. Those are real things. Actually, they're the things that most wars are actually about, but the lying leaders find it easier to persuade people that they're about whose side the sky daddy is on. 

 

[Marka Ragnos]

2 hours ago, fruitvilla said:

I don't particularly care about the authenticity of the story. I don't think it is authentic. I do wonder how people might come to such a belief though. But this 'story' is a core belief of mainline Christianity. This of course includes Catholicism.  So, if one does not believe in this story then the bits that follow including the crucifixion and salvation make little sense. 

So without this particular belief in this "big miracle" then I don't find the whole thing particularly coherent.

Yes, I hear you. Got it now.

I speak only for myself, but I guess I don’t really see it as a core story, but I’m not seeking coherence either — again, I’m not much of a theologian. To me it has the hallmarks of a tale built up from a very early first century reference by Paul — and lots of virgin birth mythology? But I still use the rosary sometimes, so … 

[mjmooney]

8 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Yes, I hear you. Got it now.

I speak only for myself, but I guess I don’t really see it as a core story, but I’m not seeking coherence either — again, I’m not much of a theologian. To me it has the hallmarks of a tale built up from a very early first century reference by Paul — and lots of virgin birth mythology? But I still use the rosary sometimes, so … 

I think you're ripe for conversion to atheism. 

[Mr_Dogg]

13 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Yes, I hear you. Got it now.

I speak only for myself, but I guess I don’t really see it as a core story, but I’m not seeking coherence either — again, I’m not much of a theologian. To me it has the hallmarks of a tale built up from a very early first century reference by Paul — and lots of virgin birth mythology? But I still use the rosary sometimes, so … 

I don't understand how someone who appears so curious and open minded can still believe in a god.

[fruitvilla]

21 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

To me it has the hallmarks of a tale built up from a very early first century reference by Paul — and lots of virgin birth mythology?

More or less agree, but I would not ' blame' it all on Paul.

23 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I guess I don’t really see it as a core story,

While this is likely true for you, it is at the heart of Catholicism and much of the rest of Christianity. It is a side story in Islam, not core other than that everything is true in the Quran. You seem to say it is not even true, never mind a core story? 

While the Gospels can be taken as a parable of how to lead one's life, fair enough. But I am sure there are more up-to-date books that require less creative interpretation that can inspire us. This leads us to the properties of the God that you 'know' exists and I presume occasionaly pray to.