How likely is it?

[Nimos]

An argument from ignorance or appeal to ignorance ('ignorance' stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It says something is true because it has not yet been proved false. Or, that something is false if it has not yet been proved true.

Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity or appeal to common sense, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

Given the above statements, what do you think is most likely true in the poll above?

 

[sun rise]

Both fallacies in the OP could be used to answer the question either that the universe was or was not created.

 

[McBell]

I request that those who vote "more likely" and "less likely" show their math.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I request that those who vote "more likely" and "less likely" show their math.

Why?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm not voting, since I'd choose two of the options in the poll, and that's not allowed.

 

[JustGeorge]

Created... what does this mean?

Yes, I know the definition, but when it comes to this argument, 'creation' typically means something zapped it into being.

If a person creates life, they likely did so by reproducing, not by building something in a Frankenstein type lab. For something to be created, it doesn't mean that some outside being had to make it up like a child with play doh.

I didn't vote, because the poll doesn't reflect my thinking.

 

[Revoltingest]

I request that those who vote "more likely" and "less likely" show their math.

(more likely loopiness rating) > (less likely loopiness rating)
Of course this cannot be proven.
Tis just how things seem based upon experience.

 

[Nimos]

Created... what does this mean?

Yes, I know the definition, but when it comes to this argument, 'creation' typically means something zapped it into being.

If a person creates life, they likely did so by reproducing, not by building something in a Frankenstein type lab. For something to be created, it doesn't mean that some outside being had to make it up like a child with play doh.

I didn't vote, because the poll doesn't reflect my thinking.

Whatever created mean to you, God, aliens, magic. As long as you take the stuff into consideration that I asked for

 

[JustGeorge]

Whatever created mean to you, God, aliens, magic.

But what if it means none of those things?

Edit: And what is the alternative to created?

 

[Nimos]

But what if it means none of those things?

Edit: And what is the alternative to created?

Im not asking, whether you indeed think it is created or not. Simply what you think is more likely in this scenario. If you don't think it is created just assume that it could be

 

[AlexanderG]

It appears we can't currently answer the question of whether or not the universe was created. Arguments from ignorance or incredulity can be used to prop up unjustified applications of our intuition, as I see many apologists doing. It's really all just speculation and wishful thinking.

We have no frame of reference. We have no other examples. We have no statistics. We have no confirmed mathematical or physical models to describe how anything interacted or was configured prior to the Planck time. We can't determine what was possible or impossible, let alone likely.

We do know that natural explanations have a long history of replacing prior supernatural explanations for the various phenomena in question. If nothing else, that could increase the likelihood of a natural explanation by a tiny bit in my mind, but we really can't say one way or the other.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Most likely it is an empty form and doesn't exist in the sense that we think of existence.

A. If the universe exists without being created -- then why does it appear to be running out of kinetic energy? (per the laws of thermodynamics)

B. If it is a creation -- then out of what and from what is it made? This question can be asked inductively until you decide to ask question A.

C. If it is not real -- then there is no problem. You accept that it is the empty form of that would would be a universe if such a thing existed.

 

[McBell]

Why?

I strongly suspect that the majority of people have not actually thought about the likely hood presented in the poll.
They merely answer based upon the dictates of their belief.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

An argument from ignorance or appeal to ignorance ('ignorance' stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It says something is true because it has not yet been proved false. Or, that something is false if it has not yet been proved true.

Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity or appeal to common sense, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

Given the above statements, what do you think is most likely true in the poll above?

The second one. Belief doesn't make it true and can be easily challenged and create cognitive dissonance. It being false most likely one has to admit defeat (admit ignorance or just not true) or find a stronger argument.

I can't even say "less likely." My atheistic mind says it isn't true at all. I have no criteria to determine if it could be true and I have no basis of comparison to establish what having a creator even means (and what exactly is it). So, if I said I didn't know, I'm not sure what I'm basing this on.

 

[Nimos]

Both fallacies in the OP could be used to answer the question either that the universe was or was not created.

I request that those who vote "more likely" and "less likely" show their math.

I'm not voting, since I'd choose two of the options in the poll, and that's not allowed.

Created... .

(more likely loopiness rating) ...

It appears we can't...

Most likely it is an empty....

The second one....

Thanks for answering, im a bit surprised, which might be because people just answer the poll without reading But given the statements I wrote and asked to be taken into consideration when answering the poll, for some reason some people thought it was "more likely" or "less likely" that the Universe was created, despite the fact that nothing in these descriptions ought to increase the chance of it being one or the other, as they have nothing to do with whether or not a Universe is created, which I didn't really think about when I wrote it, but now it actually surprise me a bit But again, it might just be because people interpret it the best they could.

Anyway, after watching this would you change your vote to something else, again based on what the good man Neil deGrasse Tyson explains about the argument from ignorance? (It's a quite funny chat about UFOs )

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I request that those who vote "more likely" and "less likely" show their math.

And I request that they also explicate their criteria for "likely."

As it stands, the OP is irrelevant and the poll is nonsensical.

 

[osgart]

It was most likely spawned like a seed from a foundational reality of vast non living intelligence. I don't think intelligence is necessarily of mind. But intelligence is for the purpose of life. Evidence would be that our universe had an absolute beginning, is finely tuned, and has coded information in it with nano machines. I believe there is a life principle evidenced by consciousness, and the subject that experiences it.

Other days I'm not so sure. I have my doubts.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

An argument from ignorance or appeal to ignorance ('ignorance' stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It says something is true because it has not yet been proved false. Or, that something is false if it has not yet been proved true.

Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity or appeal to common sense, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

Given the above statements, what do you think is most likely true in the poll above?

I will take door number 2 please

the poll should have 100% respondents saying “don’t know”

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

And I request that they also explicate their criteria for "likely."

As it stands, the OP is irrelevant and the poll is nonsensical.

is it possible for any poll to be nonsensical?

 

[Revoltingest]

I will take door number 2 please

the poll should have 100% respondents saying “don’t know”

That's the rigorously logical answer.
But it's no fun, & I'm tired of giving it.
So I picked door #2.