Christian Overconfidence

[Oscar_Kipling]

Athanasius

I just watched a lil 10 minute video to get refreshed on Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism.


1. That in evolution it shouldn't matter if the belief that the evolved biology generates is true so long as it causes an advantageous behavior.

2.Therefore if evolution were true we should expect it to produce unreliable cognitive faculties, memory, senses and so on.

3. therefore if evolution is true then you can't trust your cognitive faculties, memory, senses and so on and shouldn't have confidence in the truth of any beliefs including evolution.

Is there more to the argument than that or is that the gist of it? if so do you think this is a good argument?

[Fenris]

Like, i don't agree exactly, but I also want to see where this is going so for the sake of argument, agreed.

Well, that's it. Religion and the bible gave the world its moral system.

[Oscar_Kipling]

Like, i don't agree exactly, but I also want to see where this is going so for the sake of argument, agreed.

Well, that's it. Religion and the bible gave the world its moral system.

well, I appreciate you taking the time out to discuss this with me, thank you.

[ProDeo]

I mean I've always thought I was unique but i dont think I'd be the first guy whose head explodes if God sent me a vision...Like is there a single recorded case of traumatic vision injury? I get it it maybe I don't like it, I captured fried and ate cicadas last brood I didn't not do it because they might taste like tree sap and dirt ...which they did and a little like shrimp, 3 out of 5 would eat bugs again. Likelihood, Oh I have no idea we'd need to be specific. A guy once told me something about traffic lights changing after he prayed being a sign of Gods glory, that one I could definitely wriggle my way out of pretty easily though I might run some tests to see if its repeatable and if it is then I might end up getting arrested for tearing apart traffic lights. I mean why would God send a vision that is obviously misconfigured for me, fine if free will is important i'm cool with seeing how I deal with just enough wiggle room. Thine is, the faithful get visions so its all kinda moot. No, Its more like I frequently require proof or some compelling rational argument (or I at least have to find it so) to believe things. God doesn't owe me anything as I understand it, But he both loves and wants me...I know how I act under those conditions, take me out for dinner and dancing...but His ways I suppose. It doesn't make sense to me, actually not making sense is something I can deal with, It has internal logic, but it does not seem to comport with reality or reason.

Don't underestimate prayer. As a young Christian I once had to make a hard decision, what to do with the rest of my life, I had two choices and I did not know what to choose. I decided to leave it up to the Lord because He would know best. Now at that time I drove in a very old Opel Ascona (my first car) with as license plate 17-23-UX and I knew there were only 2 newer cars (and one old like mine)  in the Netherlands that had the same 6 characters only in a different order. And I asked the Lord to show me one of those as a sign what to decide. At the time the Netherlands had 5 million cars. It's a bit like winning the lottery if that would happen.

The months passed nothing happened (to my shame I was already a bit forgotten about the prayer) and then on a sunny afternoon I saw one driving right in front of me. Shock! The same week I saw the second one. Shock! Two jackpots in one week.

It's seems I am a bit hard of hearing, God answering in plural to me, maybe He was making fun of my unbelief.

Maybe, or maybe it wasn't as statistically unlikely as you think...but idk It just doesn't do much for me.

Well, I am a number guy, and the only 2 cars in the Netherlands (by accident) driving in my area of the country and I (by accident) seeing them in one week is too much randomness. The odds are 1 to 8.333.333.333.

[Oscar_Kipling]

I mean I've always thought I was unique but i dont think I'd be the first guy whose head explodes if God sent me a vision...Like is there a single recorded case of traumatic vision injury? I get it it maybe I don't like it, I captured fried and ate cicadas last brood I didn't not do it because they might taste like tree sap and dirt ...which they did and a little like shrimp, 3 out of 5 would eat bugs again. Likelihood, Oh I have no idea we'd need to be specific. A guy once told me something about traffic lights changing after he prayed being a sign of Gods glory, that one I could definitely wriggle my way out of pretty easily though I might run some tests to see if its repeatable and if it is then I might end up getting arrested for tearing apart traffic lights. I mean why would God send a vision that is obviously misconfigured for me, fine if free will is important i'm cool with seeing how I deal with just enough wiggle room. Thine is, the faithful get visions so its all kinda moot. No, Its more like I frequently require proof or some compelling rational argument (or I at least have to find it so) to believe things. God doesn't owe me anything as I understand it, But he both loves and wants me...I know how I act under those conditions, take me out for dinner and dancing...but His ways I suppose. It doesn't make sense to me, actually not making sense is something I can deal with, It has internal logic, but it does not seem to comport with reality or reason.

Don't underestimate prayer. As a young Christian I once had to make a hard decision, what to do with the rest of my life, I had two choices and I did not know what to choose. I decided to leave it up to the Lord because He would know best. Now at that time I drove in a very old Opel Ascona (my first car) with as license plate 17-23-UX and I knew there were only 2 newer cars (and one old like mine)  in the Netherlands that had the same 6 characters only in a different order. And I asked the Lord to show me one of those as a sign what to decide. At the time the Netherlands had 5 million cars. It's a bit like winning the lottery if that would happen.

The months passed nothing happened (to my shame I was already a bit forgotten about the prayer) and then on a sunny afternoon I saw one driving right in front of me. Shock! The same week I saw the second one. Shock! Two jackpots in one week.

It's seems I am a bit hard of hearing, God answering in plural to me, maybe He was making fun of my unbelief.

Maybe, or maybe it wasn't as statistically unlikely as you think...but idk It just doesn't do much for me.

Well, I am a number guy, and the only 2 cars in the Netherlands (by accident) driving in my area of the country and I (by accident) seeing them in one week is too much randomness. The odds are 1 to 8.333.333.333.

Far be it from me to impune your aptitude with numbers, yet I have my doubts that however you arrived at that number you captured every relevant factor....but hey maybe you did and it's reasonably accurate.

[Athanasius]

Athanasius

I just watched a lil 10 minute video to get refreshed on Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism.


1. That in evolution it shouldn't matter if the belief that the evolved biology generates is true so long as it causes an advantageous behavior.

2.Therefore if evolution were true we should expect it to produce unreliable cognitive faculties, memory, senses and so on.

3. therefore if evolution is true then you can't trust your cognitive faculties, memory, senses and so on and shouldn't have confidence in the truth of any beliefs including evolution.

Is there more to the argument than that or is that the gist of it? if so do you think this is a good argument?

That's the general gist, although the argument is probabilistic. It purports to raise the spectre of epistemic doubt in relation to the first premise: how can one's faculties be trusted if advantageous behaviour rather than truth-seeking is the evolutionary 'target'. It's a good argument whether one finds it compelling, and it's generated quite a few responses. There are two main formulations of it, actually. The first from '93 and the second from '08.

I mention it as it's interesting to think about, and particularly - though this is an aside - when rejections of the EAAN come into conflict with postmodernist conceptions of truth propositions, i.e., that we have no access to the world as it is, but only our perceptions.

[Athanasius]

Like, i don't agree exactly, but I also want to see where this is going so for the sake of argument, agreed.

Well, that's it. Religion and the bible gave the world its moral system.

Hardly a controversial suggestion given the development of moral systems did indeed occur in a pre-scientific age.

[ProDeo]

I mean I've always thought I was unique but i dont think I'd be the first guy whose head explodes if God sent me a vision...Like is there a single recorded case of traumatic vision injury? I get it it maybe I don't like it, I captured fried and ate cicadas last brood I didn't not do it because they might taste like tree sap and dirt ...which they did and a little like shrimp, 3 out of 5 would eat bugs again. Likelihood, Oh I have no idea we'd need to be specific. A guy once told me something about traffic lights changing after he prayed being a sign of Gods glory, that one I could definitely wriggle my way out of pretty easily though I might run some tests to see if its repeatable and if it is then I might end up getting arrested for tearing apart traffic lights. I mean why would God send a vision that is obviously misconfigured for me, fine if free will is important i'm cool with seeing how I deal with just enough wiggle room. Thine is, the faithful get visions so its all kinda moot. No, Its more like I frequently require proof or some compelling rational argument (or I at least have to find it so) to believe things. God doesn't owe me anything as I understand it, But he both loves and wants me...I know how I act under those conditions, take me out for dinner and dancing...but His ways I suppose. It doesn't make sense to me, actually not making sense is something I can deal with, It has internal logic, but it does not seem to comport with reality or reason.

Don't underestimate prayer. As a young Christian I once had to make a hard decision, what to do with the rest of my life, I had two choices and I did not know what to choose. I decided to leave it up to the Lord because He would know best. Now at that time I drove in a very old Opel Ascona (my first car) with as license plate 17-23-UX and I knew there were only 2 newer cars (and one old like mine)  in the Netherlands that had the same 6 characters only in a different order. And I asked the Lord to show me one of those as a sign what to decide. At the time the Netherlands had 5 million cars. It's a bit like winning the lottery if that would happen.

The months passed nothing happened (to my shame I was already a bit forgotten about the prayer) and then on a sunny afternoon I saw one driving right in front of me. Shock! The same week I saw the second one. Shock! Two jackpots in one week.

It's seems I am a bit hard of hearing, God answering in plural to me, maybe He was making fun of my unbelief.

Maybe, or maybe it wasn't as statistically unlikely as you think...but idk It just doesn't do much for me.

Well, I am a number guy, and the only 2 cars in the Netherlands (by accident) driving in my area of the country and I (by accident) seeing them in one week is too much randomness. The odds are 1 to 8.333.333.333.

Far be it from me to impune your aptitude with numbers, yet I have my doubts that however you arrived at that number you captured every relevant factor....but hey maybe you did and it's reasonably accurate.

I can give you a second example of an answered prayer, but the odds are only 1 to 10.077.696 

[ProDeo]

Like, i don't agree exactly, but I also want to see where this is going so for the sake of argument, agreed.

Well, that's it. Religion and the bible gave the world its moral system.

Hardly a controversial suggestion given the development of moral systems did indeed occur in a pre-scientific age.

The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi is dated 1750 BC

[Fenris]

Well, that's it. Religion and the bible gave the world its moral system.

well, I appreciate you taking the time out to discuss this with me, thank you.

The significance:

I am not a Christian. I do not believe in salvation via faith. In fact, I don't believe that God is significantly interested in what we think. What concerns Him is how we behave. The bible being the ethical foundation of western civ means that billions of people are following God's blueprint for how He expects us to act.

[Fenris]

Hardly a controversial suggestion given the development of moral systems did indeed occur in a pre-scientific age.

The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi is dated 1750 BC

The code of Hammurabi is a set of rules, sure, but it is not a "moral system" in any way that we recognize the term.

For example, if A builds a house for B, and the house collapses and kills B's child, then the punishment under Hammurabi's code is that A's child is killed in response.

This is not "moral" according to the bible nor (by extension) according to western civ. It teaches us nothing about personal responsibility for one's behavior. It is in fact the furthering of the concept that was prevalent at the time of child sacrifice, because, much like that, a child is not seen as a distinct individual but only as property of the parents.

[ProDeo]

Hardly a controversial suggestion given the development of moral systems did indeed occur in a pre-scientific age.

The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi is dated 1750 BC

The code of Hammurabi is a set of rules, sure, but it is not a "moral system" in any way that we recognize the term.

For example, if A builds a house for B, and the house collapses and kills B's child, then the punishment under Hammurabi's code is that A's child is killed in response.

This is not "moral" according to the bible nor (by extension) according to western civ. It teaches us nothing about personal responsibility for one's behavior. It is in fact the furthering of the concept that was prevalent at the time of child sacrifice, because, much like that, a child is not seen as a distinct individual but only as property of the parents.

It's definitely about morals and when morals started to develop, or the earliest proof of its existence, the subject at hand. It of course has nothing to do with the Torah.

[Fenris]

It's definitely about morals and when morals started to develop

It's a code of laws. There's nothing particularly "moral" about it. Nor (weirdly enough) is there any evidence that it was ever actually used. And in the context of this discussion all it does is muddy the waters.  Hammurabi's code is not the source of our values and morals. The bible is.

[Athanasius]

I think the question is whether works of jurisprudence are in themselves a moral system, and I think we might only get there negatively, or, if it is there, that it is so foreign to our understanding of moral systems that we don't recognise it as such (going back to what Fenris wrote above). So I think the point Fenris is making is that today's world derives much of its morality from the Bible (the Western world for the moment, anyway), not that the bible catalogues the very first people to think about morals or ethics.

...because I do think a legal code implies something about morality. But it is not itself the moral code, and I don't know that we have such an ancient example of a moral system?

[Fenris]

...because I do think a legal code implies something about morality.

Why should the mere existence of a legal code imply morality? A legal code can be moral or immoral, depending on what it contains. We don't even have to go back to ancient history for that. Nazi Germany had a legal code that legalized genocide. That's why the Nazi leadership had to be tried under the heading of "crimes against humanity". Because what they did was perfectly legal under their country's laws at the time that they did it.