1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Negative Belief and Proof

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Fool, Aug 4, 2022.

  1. Fool

    Fool ALL in all
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    14,390
    Ratings:
    +3,212
    Religion:
    Light Impressed with Love
    could, or would, a being prove what they don't believe exists? would there be any motivation to even try?

    would a fundamental spiritualist have any motivation to believe in evolution; if they believe literally in their religious book?


    would a fundamental materialist have any motivation in the idea of consiousness as something more than a brain?
     
    #1 Fool, Aug 4, 2022
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2022
  2. The Hammer

    The Hammer Fork-Beard
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,554
    Ratings:
    +18,036
    Religion:
    Druid
    Via negativa? Apophatic theology?
     
    #2 The Hammer, Aug 4, 2022
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Fool

    Fool ALL in all
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    14,390
    Ratings:
    +3,212
    Religion:
    Light Impressed with Love
    no, looking more how belief motivates/deters the seeker based on how their belief is positive/negative.

    people don't seek something that holds no value for them. it's a risk/reward behavior. some will hold on to their beliefs, both positive/negative and realize a reward, or reality of their belief. some will not but might later be realized by another.
     
    #3 Fool, Aug 4, 2022
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2022
    • Useful Useful x 2
  4. Link

    Link Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    9,689
    Ratings:
    +2,611
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    I've gone both ways. Sought to prove Islam wrong, and sought to prove Islam right, and there came a time when the battle between the two notions in my mind would be at so much so I would wake up one way and sleep the other way and this went on with me tormenting myself between the two views.

    I also sought to disprove and prove God.

    May God help all truth seekers find it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Heyo

    Heyo Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    11,137
    Ratings:
    +10,253
    Religion:
    none
    It's called "the scientific method". Make a hypothesis then do your best to disprove it.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    17,080
    Ratings:
    +30,219
    Religion:
    Hindu
    Do your best to disprove it? I don't think that's the scientific method. Nothing here about "do[ing] your best to disprove."

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    30,535
    Ratings:
    +14,475
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    No.
     
  8. The Hammer

    The Hammer Fork-Beard
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,554
    Ratings:
    +18,036
    Religion:
    Druid
    Neither of these are necessary for true belief and peace, friend. Serenity can be found within.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  9. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    8,376
    Ratings:
    +7,621
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    Why would they care? I don't believe Santa Claus exists, why would I bother to rove Santa doesn't exist?

    Spiritual frauds reject science. If they reject science and facts then they aren't much of a spiritualist. They are certain types of anti-science dogmatist.

    Spiritual people are rooted in a foundation of truth, and they will accept facts and science.


    No, consciousness is a function of living brains. Why pretend it is something else? It's not truth.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Nakosis

    Nakosis Time Efficient Lollygagger
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    21,570
    Ratings:
    +11,446
    Religion:
    Scientism
    Sure, fundamental to critical thinking.
    Continue to question that which you accept and that which you don't accept. How else would we be able to self correct?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Nakosis

    Nakosis Time Efficient Lollygagger
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    21,570
    Ratings:
    +11,446
    Religion:
    Scientism
    Actually, to be through, it would be part of the testing. Scientists often go about trying to disprove each others hypothesis. Of course the individual "scientist" may have a bias to support their own hypothesis. That's why peer review is an important part of science.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. QuestioningMind

    QuestioningMind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    5,453
    Ratings:
    +4,140
    Religion:
    atheist
    It's how a hypothesis eventually gets elevated to the status of a theory. When science proposes a hypothesis the next step is to find ways to test the hypothesis, that is to try and find ways to disprove it. If the hypothesis fails the test, it is disproven and can be discarded. If the hypothesis passes the test then that becomes evidence to support the hypothesis. Then they try and find a new way to test the hypothesis. The more different tests the hypothesis passes, the more evidence there is to support it. If after relentless testing a hypothesis fails to be disproven then the hypothesis can eventually attain the status of a scientific theory. Which then becomes the working model for whatever phenomenon is being investigated.

    So the scientific method is indeed a process of trying to disprove claims.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    21,742
    Ratings:
    +11,356
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    It's easy to prove something doesn't exist if that something is clearly defined, and the parameters of it's existence can be defined and ascertained. We can prove, for example, that there are no live unicorns in our basement because we can clearly recognize and define the object, as well as the parameters of it's existing.

    But without being able to do this, proving non-existence is not possible. Lack of existential evidence is meaningless unless it can be reasoned that such evidence would be recognizable and available.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    8,376
    Ratings:
    +7,621
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    This is why theists are learning to be more vague about what they believe about God. The more they express what they believe the more it can be examined and assessed for truth. Theists know this. And it is interesting how this doesn't affect why they believe. That sort of doubt would lead to less conviction to a rational mind.
     
  15. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    21,742
    Ratings:
    +11,356
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    God IS a very "vague" concept. So from that perspective, they are just becoming more honest about it, and less enthralled with past fictional characterizations.
    I'm hoping that someday they will be able to let go of their "belief" all together, and rely on their faith, instead. "Belief", from my perspective, is just egotism.
     
  16. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    8,376
    Ratings:
    +7,621
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    God is a large set of concepts, some very well described and others vague. The modern Christian is being more vague and less willing to even use the Bible as a source for what they claim is a God existing.


    Honest? No. They are being protective and cautious. Even you often insist a God exists, and that atheists are wrong, or deluded, or don't get it, yet you are incapable of offering any evidence, nor a coherent explanation of the evidence that a rational mind finds convincing.

    Faith is self-justified, irrational belief. It's nothing to advice as an advantage or good approach.
     
  17. Willamena

    Willamena Just me
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    39,818
    Ratings:
    +6,753
    Religion:
    Mystics
    The thing is, belief is... well, a belief. It doesn't require proof, per se, just evidence. If the question is how one would go about proving that something doesn't exist, they need nothing more than sufficient evidence.

    Beliefs can be struck down by the introduction of new, contrary information in a manner and form that they believe it. Evidence. There is hope for everybody to gain enough interest, to be motivated enough, to adopt evidence as sufficient. Materialism is one that is foundational because it touches on the nature of the world, but it can (and has) been struck down in many people by new, contrary information that they believed.
     
  18. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    21,742
    Ratings:
    +11,356
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    That's because they are letting go of traditional dictatorial "belief" and adopting a more open, faith-based concept of God. I think this is a good thing, because I think it's more honest and less 'superstitious' (fear driven).
    Oh, you're just upset because you can't so easily attack their faith as you did their fictionalized "belief". :) Faith isn't based on traditional belief (presumption). It's based on hope and the results of the act of hoping. There's nothing there for you to attack in that because there's nothing universally true about it.
    Wow! You are 'off the mark' in about three different ways in just this one sentence. :)

    1. God exists. That is self-evident. The more appropriate question is, 'what is God?' and in what ways can this God be said to exist? Clearly it exists as an idea that we all are able to grasp with enough universality for us to feel as if we are communicating with and amongst each other. So instead of attacking the endless individualized specifics of the idea, let's look at the collective universality of the idea. I would posit that as being: "the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is". As whatever else one might choose to think God is, this general description will most likely apply to the vast majority of human god-concepts.

    2. Atheists are only "wrong, deluded, and confused" to the extent that they keep imagining and insisting that there be some sort of "evidence" that they could be made aware of, would recognize, and then appreciate enough to convince them that "God exists". And of course there is no such evidence, nor is any such evidence needed. That "God exists" is self-evident. Nothing more is required. And nothing more is available. SO STOP INSISTING YOU BE GIVEN MORE! It doesn't exist, and it's not necessary, anyway. What you really want to know is 'what is God?' And in what way does God "exist"? And when you start asking THOSE questions, you will quickly realize that none of us knows the answers. All we can do is imagine the answers that we would like to be true, and live as if. And then see what comes of it.

    That's called faith.
    No, it's not. But you aren't going to let go of that definition because if you did, you'd have nothing left to condemn. Which brings us to:

    3. Atheism is a giant waste of time and energy that gains humanity nothing at all. It's just the negation of a possibility for negation's sake.
     
  19. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    8,376
    Ratings:
    +7,621
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    What do you mean by "proof"? Evidence is facts, data, or a line of connecting circumstances that allow a person a justification to decide a proposition is possibly true, or likely true, or fairly certain.

    There are people who believe in all sorts of untrue things, so their belief may be completely baseless and even implausible. They believe bad implausible ideas for non-rational reasons, and as such they are not able to reconsider their poor judgment.
     
  20. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    8,376
    Ratings:
    +7,621
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    Faith is unreliable and should not be promoted. And religious belief IS superstitious. You're trying to down sell the very thing that motivated believers.

    Regardless how you try to frame and redefine faith it is still just an emotional approach to ideas that are not rational. It is self-justified, irrational belief.

    Really, prove it. You can't. This is an arrogant claim that you know you can't defend.

    No facts here. Just fiction.

    Then if there is none of this how can you arrogantly claim "God exists."?

    Yet you can't demonstrate how any god is self-evidence. You just make the claim. You offer no explanation or facts. So we throw it out.

    So not being a theist is a waste of time? How is not believing some set of absurd and implausible ideas a waste of time? You're only showing your disdain and intolerance for freedom of thought and reason, and that is the liability of your religious belief.
     
Loading...