The difference between your example and the god question is that you are stating premises that are not known in relation to god or gods.
If your premises are known to be correct, then the optimal thing to do is to believe in Santa (assuming it is possible to just decide to believe in something).
Contrastingly, there are no known facts about the optimal strategy in relation to believing in a god or gods. Reworking your example using a god:
Either there is a god or there are several or there are none. And you can chose to either believe in a god or more than one god or not believe in a god or gods.
[ul]If god or gods exist, and you believe in one or more of them you may go to heaven when you die or you may go to hell or you may get turned into the Great Aadvark of Traal, we have no clue.
[li]If god or gods exist, and you don’t believe in one or more of them, you may go to heaven when you die or you may go to hell or you may get turned into the Great Aadvark of Traal, we have no clue.[/li][li]If no gods exist and you believe in one or more of them, you get nothing.[/li][li]If no gods exist and you don’t believe in one or more of them, you get nothing.[/ul][/li]
The way to hit the positive payout in the matrix above I’m fucked if I know. Therefore, no logical decision as to whether to have a belief or not can be derived
Of course, there’s alway the fact that theists are happier than atheists or agnostics. Won’t help me: I can’t just believe in something that I don’t believe because it’d make me happier.
This could be tested, easily, and Santa found not to exist. You can’t very well die, and report back that your present (afterlife) arrived.
My (basically atheist) philosophical conclusions aren’t the most jolly of things, but they give me a sweet melancholic view of the material world, all the sweeter for the lack of supernatural delusion and my finite experience of it.
Reminds me of a snarky comment (in one of L. Sprague deCamp’s books, IIRC) about the proliferation of mystery cults in the Roman Empire: “And, since none of their adherents could return from the dead to complain about being swindled, they cults grew and thrived.”
Why is it that guests who profess to a desire for knowledge or answers almost universally aren’t? It’s a fairly reliable marker for one who is either going to hit and run, or who will doggedly pursue a clearly faulty premise to the bitter end without evidencing the slightest bit of change or insight.
And then there is the obvious fact that societies are worse off ‘when they have God on their side’. How much of the supposed happiness of the believers is purchased at other’s expense ? How much would go away without the unbelievers carrying them on their collective back, keeping society working properly ?
And that’s assuming that believers really are happier. Given how grim, obnoxious and hateful they tend to be, and how willing to lie to support their beliefs, I have trouble believing that study. Given the dishonesty that religion tends to produce, any pro-religious results need to be held to a higher standard of proof.
And, as someone once said, happiness alone is only good enough if you are a cow.
Wow!
After a lifetime of growing up under the shadow of religion, I have heard all the benefits that a Christian is awarded by a benevolent God.
I was just looking for an idea of the benefits derived from not believing in God.
I believe there is a God and I believe in Science. I don’t believe that science can disprove the existence of God because for one, as a species, we hardly know anything about anything. We have ideas, clues, and insights but we don’t know everything.
Second, I cannot wrap my brain around happenstance and accidents creating life. I don’t blindly nay-say the proof of the existence of evolution but some things fit to perfectly to be adaptation.
My personal beliefs are mine and you have yours.
I believe in a benevolent God (with a great sense of Irony) who has given us free will to make our own decisions no matter how frivolous or idiotic they might be. Horrible things happen to good people because humans have the free will to do horrible things. Everything is a learning experience and happens for a reason one way or another.
If I am wrong, I am merely worm food and nothing else. Lights out shows over.
If I am right then the journey is just beginning. This is just the traffic to get to the airport.
Which god are you referring to? If there is a god, and you pick the wrong one, there are an almost infinite number of places you might end up other than worm food or Heaven.
Or have you chosen to completely ignore all that you have been shown about the falsity of Pascal’s Wager?
Welcome back. First thing, you should not “believe” in science. Science works by being reproducible, open, and self-critical. You should accept the findings of science to the level that there is evidence for them, and to the extent that attempts to falsify them have failed. That is why science has succeeded so well.
Second, one of the reasons why god can’t be disproven is because “god” is such a fuzzy concept. Which god do you believe in: hairy thunderer or cosmic muffin? If the God you believe in created the universe 6,000 years ago, he has been disproven about as well as we can disprove anything outside of mathematics. If your god started off the universe and never interfered, he can never be disproved. Religion has commonly changed the definition of god so as to not conflict with the findings of science - except for creationist types.
As Terry Pratchett said, isn’t it marvelous that a puddle perfectly fits into its hole? Plenty of things don’t fit perfectly. Things that do fit because individuals with less useful characteristics have less chance of reproducing.
We don’t quite know how life was created (and that has nothing to do with evolution anyway) but it is looking less and less accidental. But if you think man was destined to evolve, I see your problem. Man showed up after a series of accidents and happenstances (like the dinosaurs getting flattened - except for the birds). You are the same. If the act that resulting in the sperm and egg meeting that produced you was delayed a day or moved up a day - or maybe even a few minutes - you wouldn’t be here. Whoever would be writing in your place would consider herself to be just as inevitable as you consider yourself. If the asteroid didn’t hit, and some species of dinosaurs became intelligent, they no doubt would think their god had a plan for them.
This seems like an almost picture perfect definition of intellectual laziness:
We don’t know everything (except apparently that we don’t know everything).
I understand the mechanisms of evolution, but <whine>it’s just too hard</whine> to think about the effects of it over billions of years upon billions of organisms.
God exists, and he did some stuff, and he kinda left us alone (but not really).
Why don’t you go out on a limb and be bold? What would be different if God existed or not? How would you live differently?
Evolution is a proven fact. The only scientific arguments are how it works, not whether it does.
But we aren’t talking about opinions or matters of taste. There is a God, or there is not. There is an afterlife, or there is not. There is a soul, or there is not.
Only an evil or uncaring God would create the world as it is. And plenty of horrible things happen that have nothing to do with our mythical free will. And the claim that “everything is a learning experience” is an excuse for utter evil. Why not kill millions if everything is “just a learning experience” ? Why not torture people until they go insane if it’s “just a learning experience” ?
As said, that depends on what God actually exists, assuming that one does. And if you are wrong, as the religious typically do you will make our one and only life worse than it would otherwise be.
Science doesn’t claim to know everything. If we did know everything, there would hardly be a need to continue looking for answers. Saying “I don’t know. Let’s figure it out.” is far better than pretending to have the answer.
If all of that is true, it doesn’t absolve God of responsibility. If a creation is faulty, you blame its creator.
You can’t both use the free will idea as a reason to explain bad things and claim that everything is a learning experience which happens for a reason. Either free will exists - in which case it is quite possible that arbitrary, bad things will occur that teach nothing and happen for no reason - or all events are ordained to be great lessons and as part of a grand overall purpose, in which case there can be no free will.
This isn’t me disagreeing with you that they occur; although technically I don’t believe in either, I won’t get into those arguments unless you want me to. I’m saying you can’t have both. It’s one or the other - free will and arbitrariness, or predestined lessons and set choices. Pick one.
Couldn’t it also be that God only cares about some people, and so only choreographs their lives and surroundings, and leaves everyone else to break on the rocky shoals of cruel fate, giving them nothing more benevolent than a disinterested glance?
(Noting that nobody in the viscinity of a ‘chosen one’ could have free will.)
Not even then, really. In order to get those chosen people to exist, a god would need to get their parents together and, well, pick the right sperm, to put it bluntly. I’m pretty sure that most people who believe in free will wouldn’t deny that there is zero influence from the body, and thus they can’t even have total free will.
That’s assuming that he has to take an interest in you from pre-birth. Perhaps he only browses the earth disinterestedly, occasionally noticing a person he likes the look of, at which point he then turns everone around them into puppets and stages some mild tragedy to teach them some lesson; after which something shiny catches his attention elsewhere and he lets his control over the scenario drop, allowing it to revert to random disorder and truly go to hell.
Certainly that’s possible. But the OP phrased it pretty clearly as things always having a lesson, and I tend to assume he meant all people have free will and not just some.
