@KnowledgEcology do you know of any video/audio debates between Thompson and Metzinger?
how would we come to know anything definitive about this particular question?
-
-
we can't. it doesn't make the two alternatives equally likely.
-
How should we estimate probability in this case?
-
what's your take?
-
I find Pascal's Wager to be deeply dissatisfying. I'm not sure what kind of reasoning I would find more satisfying.
-
what are your thoughts? you seemed very dissatisfied with Batchelor-esque non-commital.
-
Agnostic atheists are atheists because they don't believe in the existence of deities and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact
-
So it is possible to say, this thing is unknowable, but I have no good reasons to believe it's true.
-
that seems very close to Batchelor's position to me. I agree that it is reasonable to not believe an unevidenced claim by default. I sometimes like to think about the psychological utility of it though, which is why I mentioned Pascal.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.