# The logic behind believing or not believing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 5, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226 "2013-06-05T17:58:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/161 "2013-06-10T14:41:20Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > I can go along with that. But I do believe that their is circumstantial evidence. You can cite circumstantial evidence that points to any particular “higher power”? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/162 "2013-06-10T14:42:29Z")
Another related question, if God was infact a physical entity that we were unable to detect would it be more likely that he was too small to detect or too large? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/163 "2013-06-10T14:44:45Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Another related question, if God was infact a physical entity that we were unable to detect would it be more likely that he was too small to detect or too large? Which “god” are you talking about? What happened to what I asked in post #161? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/164 "2013-06-10T14:47:22Z")
#161 has been answered repeatedly, just the fact that the universe exists with all its physical laws. I accept that as circumstantial evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/165 "2013-06-10T14:52:30Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > #161 has been answered repeatedly, just the fact that the universe exists with all its physical laws. I accept that as circumstantial evidence. If that is how low your standard is for circumstantial evidence for such an amazing claim, then when it comes to criticizing any claim that science may or may not make you don’t have a leg to stand on. Someone would have to actually prove the universe doesn’t exist to put a chink in that Armor of Ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/166 "2013-06-10T14:55:25Z")
The whole point of this thread is that a minority of athiests have taken an abusive and even oppressive stand against believers that is no different than any other form of predjudice. They use tecniques of ridicule and isolation to bully people into accepting their way of believing things. This can’t be good. I don’t care what any one believes, if I like you you are welcome at my table any time. I understand that some religions have imbedded themselves into political processes and laws that have become outdated and they will graqdually change. But their is no reason for animosity or hatred. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/167 "2013-06-10T14:59:32Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > The whole point of this thread is that a minority of athiests have taken an abusive and even oppressive stand against believers that is no different than any other form of predjudice. They use tecniques of ridicule and isolation to bully people into accepting their way of believing things. This can’t be good. I don’t care what any one believes, if I like you you are welcome at my table any time. I understand that some religions have imbedded themselves into political processes and laws that have become outdated and they will graqdually change. But their is no reason for animosity or hatred. And to make your point you have repeated misstated what science is, does and claims…which is exactly what some atheists are taking a stand against. I don’t think you are very successful in making your point, but you _are_ serving as a example for the other side. ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/168 "2013-06-10T15:15:10Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And to make your point you have repeated misstated what science is, does and claims…which is exactly what some atheists are taking a stand against. I don’t think you are very successful in making your point, but you _are_ serving as a example for the other side. ``` If I quoted science as having an official stand against God then I was wrong. But the athiests I am reffering to repeatedly use science as their talking point. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/169 "2013-06-10T15:18:21Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > If I quoted science as having an official stand against God then I was wrong. But the athiests I am reffering to repeatedly use science as their talking point. And in what way have they been wrong to do so? Merely using science isn’t wrong in and of itself. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/170 "2013-06-10T15:22:39Z")
> [@FuzzyOgre](#): > > The effort expended to conclude that the universe came from nothing is exactly equal to the effort to believe that god started from nothing. Not even close. The beginning (that we know of) was an apparently random jumble of lots and lots of energy. No protons, electrons, atoms, molecules, or stars, just energy, which gradually condensed into those other things. Now I don’t know how a giant glob of random energy could just appear, but it’s a fairly simple thing. Compare that to the idea of an all-knowing, all-powerful sentient being just appearing. One is unimaginably complex, the other is quite large but fundamentally simple. So if it’s a choice between accepting that the big bang just appeared, or that a god just appeared, the big bang idea is almost infinitely more believable. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/171 "2013-06-10T15:30:09Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > If I quoted science as having an official stand against God then I was wrong. But the athiests I am reffering to repeatedly use science as their talking point. Well, yes, because the progress of science has demonstrated that a lot of explanations bronze age humans had about the universe, as portrayed in the bible, have been wrong. This makes the bible wrong, which is rather a biggie if you believe it to be the Word of God. This doesn’t mean that science claims there is no god, just that science provides evidence (or proof or strongly suggests or whatever) that there might be something seriously wrong with the beliefs people have held for centuries. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/172 "2013-06-10T15:38:31Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > If I quoted science as having an official stand against God then I was wrong. But the athiests I am reffering to repeatedly use science as their talking point. Only because theists try and use claims that are refuted by science. For example: the universe could not have come into existence by itself. Well, there is currently some science that supports the idea that something can indeed come from nothing, as “nothing” is not stable. Then of course there are all the other claims that theists have made: [ul] [li]Irreducible complexity.[/li][li]The physical laws are so tailored to support human life that they must have been designed by a creator.[/li][li]The earth is 6,000 years old and all life was designed at once and came into being within a week.[/li][/ul]and so on. If you don’t want people to use science and to refute your beliefs, then don’t use them to support your beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![FuzzyOgre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@FuzzyOgre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FuzzyOgre)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/173 "2013-06-10T16:31:51Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > Not even close. The beginning (that we know of) was an apparently random jumble of lots and lots of energy. No protons, electrons, atoms, molecules, or stars, just energy, which gradually condensed into those other things. Now I don’t know how a giant glob of random energy could just appear, but it’s a fairly simple thing. > > Compare that to the idea of an all-knowing, all-powerful sentient being just appearing. > > One is unimaginably complex, the other is quite large but fundamentally simple. So if it’s a choice between accepting that the big bang just appeared, or that a god just appeared, the big bang idea is almost infinitely more believable. No that’s no good. A creator who knows all and is capable of all things is going to be incredibly complicated. _I’m_ an incredibly complicated mortal, and I am capable of barely anything at all. Still, I can do much more than a snail, which isnt nearly as complicated. If a god exists, it is going be more sophisticated than the universe it creates. Otherwise it has created something greater than itself. ---
**Author:** ![FuzzyOgre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@FuzzyOgre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FuzzyOgre)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/174 "2013-06-10T16:36:50Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > This would only be true if I deluded myself into thinking I had a chance of comprehending exactly what happened in the begaining. I accept the possibility of something non physical. I don’t want to get into religious beliefs here. Thats fine, you dont have to delve into the particulars. I agree it isn’t needed. It is reasonable to say you cannot comprehend what happened in the beginning. I cant either really. But adding more details -like a god- simply muddies the issue. Good problem solving involves breaking things down into smaller steps. The less you have to chew on, the easier it is to make sense of it all. Adding more details that you cannot understand isnt a sensible course of action. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/175 "2013-06-10T17:22:46Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Another related question, if God was infact a physical entity that we were unable to detect would it be more likely that he was too small to detect or too large? God is far too large to be detected although He can be seen, and heard everywhere. You can only know through your feelings. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/176 "2013-06-10T17:37:25Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > God is far too large to be detected although He can be seen, and heard everywhere. > You can only know through your feelings. He can’t be detected…but he _can_ be seen and heard? _Riiiight._ ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/177 "2013-06-10T18:47:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > He can’t be detected…but he _can_ be seen and heard? > > _Riiiight._ You got it. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/178 "2013-06-10T21:46:34Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Another related question, if God was infact a physical entity that we were unable to detect would it be more likely that he was too small to detect or too large? Maybe he’s huge, but really thin, and when he stands sideways, you can’t see him. (Sarcastic, yes, but semi-serious also. The claim that God is “extra-dimensional” is only a variant of this explanation.) ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/179 "2013-06-10T22:22:16Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Maybe he’s huge, but really thin, and when he stands sideways, you can’t see him. > > (Sarcastic, yes, but semi-serious also. The claim that God is “extra-dimensional” is only a variant of this explanation.) God is in everything you see, He is in you. He is love. Simple to understand ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2013, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/180 "2013-06-11T00:16:59Z")
> [@fumster](#): > > The “Yes Virgina” story is lovely, but if Virginia became an adult and still expected Santa to bring her and her children gifts then it starts to take on a more sinister aspect.Well then lets be clear: > > Is God.. That would not be consistent with the story. Have you read it? As for your other questions, I’m not sure what you are getting at. Did you read my post? I don’t believe in god as generally portrayed in the literal sense. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226.md?page=10)