P(before) starts off with 50-50 maximum ignorance -> I argue that this 50-50 divide is inaccurate since because there are so many "Gods". Shouldn’t the 50% for the existence of Gods then be divided up equally among all possible Gods?
Next I go on to analyse the Divine indicator scale and I argue that none of these indicators can provide proof of God.
1 existence of moral good -> “moral” good can be explained via CBA, Game theory and a moral actions as a behavioral evolutionary tool
2 existence of moral evil -> evil actions exist because “cheating” is a behavioral evolutionary tool. There are also a limitations of resources, dysfunctional pyschological states and power differentials.
3 existence of natural evil (disasters) -> What?! All of these are naturally occurring!
4 existence of natural and unnatural miracles -> Natural miracles are very rare and occur because of probability/ laws of physics and unnatural miracles have never been documented/ proven.
6 religious experiences -> These can be easily explained by theory of mind and/or artificialism etc
I was hoping for a more convincing equation.
And yes, since we are here. Let's talk about Pascal's wager. A fundamental flaw is that there are sooo many possible Gods! By following one God, I would be improving my probability for a comfortable afterlife but not by much. And then we are all subject to a very high probrablity of having chosen the wrong God to believe in. And if I just followed a religion just so I would not be punished, wouldn't an all-knowing God find out? And wouldn't he/she punish me accordingly?
No comments:
Post a Comment