It's simple, atheists, theists, and polytheists have just as much solid evidence as everyone else, so it's equally likely that everyone is right and wrong. In cases such as this, where there are two or more equally likely possibilities, all of these possibilities are true at once until the real answer is seen. As such, continued debates of the matter are pointless, since everyone's view is inherently correct and incorrect simultaneously until we can see for sure, right?
Put in much more simple terms, if you were to flip a coin, but cover it the moment it landed without looking at it, it will be at that moment, simultaneously heads and tails until you look at it and determine which of those two equally likely possibilities it really is. Now, I know what you're thinking, "even if we can't see it, it's still physically one or the other, right?" That is true, but in what way is religion physical, it's all about perception, is it not? Not trying to change anyone's religion here, btw
2007-11-16 03:15:39 · 14 answers · asked by Uryx 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
simon T said it best: "Perception of reality does not change reality. I can fervently believe that the coin is heads, even after I look at it and see that it is tails. My belief has no effect on the outcome at all."
Belief has no effect on the outcome, so why the need to debate religions, hm?
2007-11-16 03:28:31 · update #1
There is no evidence that unicorns exist.
But there is no evidence that they do not exist.
So is it equally probable that they do exist as that they do not?
Equally a 50:50 chance that dragons, leprechauns, mermaids and the bogeyman in your closet exist.
No, the coin is not a quantum device. It does not exist in as a quantum probability, it lands either heads or tails, you just do not know which before you look. Perception of reality does not change reality. I can fervently believe that the coin is heads, even after I look at it and see that it is tails. My belief has no effect on the outcome at all.
2007-11-16 03:25:07 · answer #1 · answered by Simon T 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Haute "Introit":
Solemn Yahoos To Quote "Interlocuteur":
"...even if we can't see, it is still physically one or the other,
right ?"
Continued: "That's true, but in What Way Is religion Physical, IT Is All About perception, Is IT Not ?"
" O Realise": "...here,btw " [blank?}
What Do You Understand by:
"The Immaculate Conception"
Narrowly Termed, By NOT Understood By "right AND wrong".
"You Are A Promissory Note":
There May Only Be: "Right OR Wrong" In Case"s" as this - As You simply "see for sure".
[Edit: Last On Answer: Reason ?: "Cyclone" In A Far away Country. Before Some Holidays. May Not "Matter" To Some:
That Has "to be" The Last 'incorrect simultaneously']
2007-11-16 03:46:31 · answer #2 · answered by Frederique C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I realize it.
And to JP why are you suprised someone would apply Schrodinger to Religion. Read a biography on him he was fascinated with religion, and would often guide the topic from physics to religion. He was not an Atheist he was a Catholic who leaned towards agnosticism based on the argument above.
I have been saying on here both those that say God does because exist there is no evidence he doesn't and those that say He doesn't because there is no evidence he does are both expressing logical falliacies.
Neither side will realize they are being as stupid as they proclaim the others to be and it is pointless to talk about, so lets move onto real religious and spirituality questions.
2007-11-16 03:27:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
properly If i'm incorrect then hi thats great, yet i'm going to confirm for particular while i'm lifeless. For now i'm merely employing my superb judgement, i do no longer care who thinks i'm top or incorrect particularly. i'm merely attempting to stay my existence the superb way i'm able to. Peace and reward = )
2016-10-02 12:03:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
religion is physical in the sense that when it is unopposed (as for example between the fourth and eighth centuries) literacy levels fall, knowledge of the world and science plummets, and international diplomacy is replaced by interminable religious wars.
religion is physical in the sense that if those who love the truth drop their guard for a moment the schools will be teaching creationism and being gay will go back to carrying a felony tariff.
2007-11-16 03:21:15 · answer #5 · answered by synopsis 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Buddha would say that everyone is right and wrong. Like Rumi says in one of his poems, once he met the beloved he was no longer Muslim, Hindu, Jew or Christian. These all fade in the light of the divine being of the universe.
2007-11-16 03:20:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think people did a fine job of unveiling the many faults of your arguement.
Welcome to postmodern thought.
2007-11-16 03:28:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm not sure some people want to think hard enough to consider that.
2007-11-16 03:24:03 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"so it's equally likely that everyone is right and wrong."
I disagree. If I claim that an invisible elf is telling me what to type, you'll disagree, but we don't have an equal chance of being right.
2007-11-16 03:19:09 · answer #9 · answered by Eleventy 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I disagree. There is absolutely NO solid evidence at all for either argument!
There's no right and wrong, ... only subjective opinion.
.
2007-11-16 03:19:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋