Freethought & Rationalism Archive

seebs · 06-19-2002, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher Lord:
<strong>But then any set of unknowable beliefs could be held if only they produce 'a consistant worldview'

This would put God on the same level as, say, believing in Zeus. In order to draw a distinction, one must have KNOWLEDGE that one is more correct than the other!

Or is the choice only determined by what your parents believe?</strong>

I wouldn't say it's *knowledge*. I'd say it's "likelihood" of one sort or another. So, for instance, I wouldn't believe in a god who lives on Mount Olympus, because you can go there and look and see no stuff.

Knowledge is a fuzzy thing; I don't consider it "knowledge" unless I'm sure of it.

Tercel · 06-19-2002, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher Lord:
Your basic point is that holding belief is not claiming to hold knowledge. Could you extrapolate on the distinction? Surely SOMETHING must prompt belief?

Hmm... The distinction I was getting at was a distinction between a vague claim and a specific one. I believe that God exists, but I don't claim to have an exact and complete understanding of the nature and motives of God.
Similarly to claim that Atoms exist is not to make the claim that you have a complete understanding of Quantum Theory.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.