Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IWantGod

Guest
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
 
Is this a serious question?
You identify yourself as Catholic.
I would think you would have a whole boatload of evidence.

But I’ll play:
If one believes in God, then one can never be disappointed.
But if one is an atheist…there’s no do-overs, and no “oopsie my bad” big enough. 😉
 
IWantGod said:
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
Click to expand...
There are two exceptional and very convincing presentations of the case for theism and, specifically, the case for Christianity.

Here is the link to the case for theism – a debate between Rabbi David Rowe and AC Grayling:

youtu.be/MTezZFZH098

And here is the case for Christianity laid down by Dr. David Campbell…

instituteofcatholicculture.org/my-lord-and-my-god-evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-christ/
 
I’m the cautious type, and I would rather be safe than sorry. I find Theism to be the safest bet per Pascal’s Wager.
 
There’s tons of threads here on Pascal’s wager.

I am a bit curious though, how does one calculate a probability for a specific god-concept?
 
IWantGod said:
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
Click to expand...
Leaving aside Pascal’s wager, I would say theist is a better choice since, based on evidence, there are so many religious traditions in the world that, one would think, one or many of them must have gotten something correct about the existence and nature of G-d, unless one thinks that it is just part of the human mind to search for G-d. That is, man needs G-d to allay his fears about life and death. Still, I go for theism rather than atheism, hope rather than despair (not that all atheists are despairing).
 
When someone figures out how such a perfectly ordered universe down to the microcellular level of organisms came about from nothing, and how an almost universal system of moral conduct is found in most societies across the board without any contact between them, maybe I will consider atheism. Until then, atheism is an illogical belief system.
 
IWantGod said:
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
Click to expand...
How did you calculate the probability? Please show me the math.

If you are judging based on reasonableness, please show me, Your Honor (since you’re the one judging):
  1. the exhibits of evidence you admitted into evidence and
  2. how the evidence was weighed (i.e. preponderance of the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, etc.) and why that standard is appropriate.
 
It’s a lot easier to get motivated when a guy has a point to his existence.
 
IWantGod said:
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
Click to expand...
Read Pascal’s Pensées if you have not already. It is not that hard to understand, well worth the effort. I think the fact that 2+2=4 *is *- is enough to convince me of evidence of a creator, but there is so much more order and complexity in the universe on top of that. Is it logical to believe something came from nothing? Or that something came from something.

Also the human perspective on existence is limited to our perception, reason, (to the extent we apply reason, which is spotty). Just because we can conceive or contemplate the universe does not mean we have the mind of a creator, or are Gods ourselves. That argument, to me, is irrational. I vote theist. The question of the nature of the creator is where things get tricky, very tricky, good, evil, etc.
 
Catholic Answers has a good video for this question.

The link is here:
catholic.com/video/the-existence-of-god-probable-or-improbable

Catholic Answers also has other helpful material, articles, video posts, ect. to help.
There is also Trent Horn’s “Why are you an atheist?”, in which he allows atheists/unbelievers and attempt to object; as well as other Catholic Answers Radio Shows.

The link for the radio shows, which includes “Why are you an atheist?”, and similar Catholic Answers radio shows, can be found here:
catholic.com/radio/calendar/2016-07
You can change the months/years to get the specific show you want. I highly recommend this, this will help respond to common objections

P.S. tonight is an Open Forum (anyone can call and ask a question) with Karl Keating and Tim Staples

God bless and grace you
 
There is nothing more evident than that things are in motion. Etc.

God is not an object of probabilities. We know by natural reason that He exists.

This is the teaching of Vatican I.
 
IWantGod said:
Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: Not a Catholic opinion, obviously…

Ah yes, Pascal’s Wager. The real problem is that there are way mute than just two choices.

How would you choose the “correct” God and the “correct” religion and denomination? Many religions claim they are correct and choosing the other religions leads to some flavor of doom and despair. It halfway applies to denominations.

My human experience leads me to believe there could be something more or it could be the human nature to draw conclusions and relationships where none exist. But ultimately I currently see it as unknowable until it is too late.
 
I am not going to provide an argument, just some quick thoughts on the matter. For me I don’t see atheism as very realistic. But, that is based on my own combination of experiences, reasoning and intuition, as well as an openness to God. The answer to this question will depend on the person’s bias. I don’t think one could be entirely unbiased. Aquinas gives us 5 ways. I find the argument from design, as well an argument for the first cause and the argument for a self-existing being, the contingency argument to be persuasive. As well, Dr. Craig makes a number of good points. The impossibility of an infinite past for instance. And to top it off I think intuitively it just makes the most sense we are here because of some divine intelligence. It just doesn’t make sense to me that the universe exists spontaneously. I guess that flows into the argument of design. But at some point you have to step back and ask yourself is all this really just here by chance? If you don’t think so then you are not an atheist. Even the laws of nature are evidence of design. Where do they come from?
 
fisherman_carl said:
I am not going to provide an argument, just some quick thoughts on the matter. For me I don’t see atheism as very realistic. But, that is based on my own combination of experiences, reasoning and intuition, as well as an openness to God. The answer to this question will depend on the person’s bias. I don’t think one could be entirely unbiased. Aquinas gives us 5 ways. I find the argument from design, as well an argument for the first cause and the argument for a self-existing being, the contingency argument to be persuasive. As well, Dr. Craig makes a number of good points. The impossibility of an infinite past for instance. And to top it off I think intuitively it just makes the most sense we are here because of some divine intelligence. It just doesn’t make sense to me that the universe exists spontaneously. I guess that flows into the argument of design. But at some point you have to step back and ask yourself is all this really just here by chance? If you don’t think so then you are not an atheist. Even the laws of nature are evidence of design. Where do they come from?
Click to expand...
Yes. I was an atheist for a number of years. It is definitely a “belief,” a decision one makes about existence, just like faith. I think a lot of people overestimate their capacity to understand existence. They really think their mind can accurately and completely engage, encompass the essence of existence, big bang, dark matter, space, time, you name it. What you see is what you get. Even when I was an atheist I struggled with the limitations of that mindset. I was willing to admit I could never know anything about the big bang, right, so why the heck would I trust human comprehension/knowledge on God or the lack of same? We say what is beyond our comprehension is the unknown…uh, because it is beyond our capacity to know. Doesn’t mean it is a VOID. That is not a logical conclusion. And yet that conclusion is considered “rational” these days. :o Really smart. Blake’s “mind-forged manacles.”
 
Ok, I can respect that.

Speaking for myself, not all atheist, I can say that yes there are gaps in atheism around fundamental questions of reality. In those gaps I simply accept that I do not know.

I suppose at the end of it it comes down to which premise makes more sense based on one’s experiences and views and bias. And that is where I differ compared to the vast majority (85-97%?) of humanity.

Part of my reason for being on this board is to better understand believers. This is directed to anyone who wants to reply. Would it be fair to say that you feel there has to be some external source of meaning? And did this prompted your search into the possibility of God (and obviously leading to Catholicism being true)?
 
HerCrazierHalf said:
Ok, I can respect that.

Speaking for myself, not all atheist, I can say that yes there are gaps in atheism around fundamental questions of reality. In those gaps I simply accept that I do not know.

I suppose at the end of it it comes down to which premise makes more sense based on one’s experiences and views and bias. And that is where I differ compared to the vast majority (85-97%?) of humanity.

Part of my reason for being on this board is to better understand believers. This is directed to anyone who wants to reply. Would it be fair to say that you feel there has to be some external source of meaning? And did this prompted your search into the possibility of God (and obviously leading to Catholicism being true)?
Click to expand...
I called that agnosticism. The ultimate hedging of one’s bets. 😉

I think people need meaning in the face of death, suffering, evil. Otherwise, they don’t see a point to life. Meaning is found in love, providence, transcendence, redemption, joy to the Christian - God is reflected/present/revealed in these things, even in life, which is a great gift, and is eternal. A Christian would never say life is without external meaning.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
There’s tons of threads here on Pascal’s wager.

I am a bit curious though, how does one calculate a probability for a specific god-concept?
Click to expand...
I think the Op is predicated on a simple choice between one or the other.
Atheism versus Theism rather than… atheism versus Christianity versus Hinduism versus Islam versus Wicca etc etc.

Pascal’s Wager is just one of the rationales that weigh in favor of the God Conclusion. But it is a pretty good one in my opinion. The afterlife question is the wrong thing to be wrong about. We really should give God the benefit of the doubt - especially if our doubt (skepticism) is the product of an irrational ego or vanity which mistakenly thinks we humans are the highest beings in the universe/multiverse of space time.
 
“…if one had to make a choice…” We make the choice each day to believe or not believe in some way or ways small or large. I make the choice each day as I ponder what I’m learning to say I don’t know. I could easily on some days make the choice to completely not believe and some days make the choice to believe Christianity or any other tradition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top