Creation vs. Evolution

[Danoff]

Ok I'm going to put this as plainly as I know how. Everything to me is a matter of probability. It's a judgement call based on evidence.

Imagine yourself in Vegas. You walk up to a booth where they're playing a game. Here's the game:

You put down a chip
They roll a die.
If the die lands on 6, they take your chip.
Otherwise, they pay you a chip.

Simple enough right? Obviously you want to play this game. You want to play this game all night and get free money (because you'll win 5 out of 6 times). So you put down your chip.

You've just acted. You've taken an action under the assumption that you're going to make money. The die could come up 6, you might lose your chip. But you acted anyway in an uncertain evironment because you estimated the probability of success was greater than the probability of failure.

That's life for me. Everything I do is a judgement call. I know I might be wrong. I know if I accept what someone is telling me as true that they might be lying. But I've made a judgement call based on past evidence.

It's really that simple. No faith involved, no belief, no notion that I know the truth.

 

[UnoMOTO]

And so you understand that am following you. I know that you don't HAVE to believe anything for you to exist. But the fact is that over time through the words you have used to defend evolution and other things, you have proven that you do believe.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source
be‧lief  /bɪˈlif/
–noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
be‧lieve  /bɪˈliv/
–verb (used without object) 1. to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so: Only if one believes in something can one act purposefully.

Precisely.

 

[Danoff]

And so you understand that am following you. I know that you don't HAVE to believe anything for you to exist. But the fact is that over time through the words you have used to defend evolution and other things, you have proven that you do believe.

Quote me.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Ok I'm going to put this as plainly as I know how. Everything to me is a matter of probability. It's a judgement call based on evidence.

Imagine yourself in Vegas. You walk up to a booth where they're playing a game. Here's the game:

You put down a chip
They roll a die.
If the die lands on 6, they take your chip.
Otherwise, they pay you a chip.

Simple enough right? Obviously you want to play this game. You want to play this game all night and get free money (because you'll win 5 out of 6 times). So you put down your chip.

You've just acted. You've taken an action under the assumption that you're going to make money. The die could come up 6, you might lose your chip. But you acted anyway in an uncertain evironment because you estimated the probability of success was greater than the probability of failure.

That's life for me. Everything I do is a judgement call. I know I might be wrong. I know if I accept what someone is telling me as true that they might be lying. But I've made a judgement call based on past evidence.

It's really that simple. No faith involved, no belief, no notion that I know the truth.

I don't think FAMINE is the only one in denial.

I hope for your sake, your wife is not reading this. I wouldn't want her to find out that she's only a judgment call.

 

[UnoMOTO]

Quote me.

The part I don't think your understanding from us is that we have observed you, famime and wfooshee. During that time we may conclude things about your thoughts and behaviors. This is the only evidence we have to draw conclusions from. Not so different than your vegas example. I couldn't search through every thread you have posted to find a quote or two that would sum you up.That wouldn't be fair to you. It just doesn't add up to us that until the last few days you guys said everything with conviction and belief. Now after all of those debates your telling us that you don't have a belief system based on observation. 2 + 2 = 7

 

[Danoff]

I don't think FAMINE is the only one in denial.

I hope for your sake, your wife is not reading this. I wouldn't want her to find out that she's only a judgment call.

My wife knows full well how I think. I'm a judgement call to her as well. We understand each other.

Honsetly I didn't think Famine was right when he said that you guys could simply not comprehend a lack of belief. How wrong I was to doubt him.

The part I don't think your understanding from us is that we have observed you, famime and wfooshee. During that time we may conclude things about your thoughts and behaviors. This is the only evidence we have to draw conclusions from. Not so different than your vegas example. I couldn't search through every thread you have posted to find a quote or two that would sum you up.That wouldn't be fair to you. It just doesn't add up to us that until the last few days you guys said everything with conviction and belief. Now after all of those debates your telling us that you don't have a belief system based on observation. 2 + 2 = 7

Look if you're going to claim that I've said something that indicates I have a belief, the least you could do is try to back it up. I'm telling you right now that I don't. You can ask me about any of the things you think I have a belief in and I will tell you there is some doubt (except for the fact that I exist, I have no doubt about that).

If that's not the very definition of not having belief in something, I don't know what is.

 

[Swift]

Honsetly I didn't think Famine was right when he said that you guys could simply not comprehend a lack of belief. How wrong I was to doubt him.

I comprehend both sides. Because I know what it's like not to believe in God.

But this is getting really boring now. We've come to the conclusion that Danoff has at least one belief and Famine has zero.

Can we do something more fun now?

 

[Famine]

I guess since I'm such a trusting person, I can't imagine some one with no trust in anyone or anything.

Trust is a judgement on probability from available evidence. If the available evidence says that, more often than not, someone carries out acts contrary to their words then the probability is that they will do it again next time. If not, the probability is that they won't.

Each time they act, a mental analysis occurs which processes whether or not they are acting against their words and redetermines the probability.

Sorry Famine but by this definition you do have belief.

I wondered how long it'd take for someone to run to a dictionary and find a single definition, in amongst many others which don't fit, which can be crowbarred into the present context. Still... let's examine!

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source
be‧lief  /bɪˈlif/
–noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.

Interesting choice of words at the end there - they use an example of an opinion or conviction which has no basis in fact as being a belief.

2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.

Underlined part - oh so very busted.

3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.

Confidence is a measure of probability in mathematics, and just a synonym. Example at the end involves that of an unformed mind.

4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.

I think we'll just skip this one without any further comment.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
be‧lieve  /bɪˈliv/
–verb (used without object) 1. to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so: Only if one believes in something can one act purposefully.

Interesting definition and possibly acceptable, if it weren't for that really, really weak quasi-philosophical quote at the end and the use of the crowbar again for the synonymical "confidence". I'll grant you a point for this one.

–verb (used with object) 2. to have confidence or faith in the truth of (a positive assertion, story, etc.); give credence to.

Again with "confidence", and really hamstrung by "faith".

3. to have confidence in the assertions of (a person).

Ibid. - and already dealt with through "The Theory of Pako".

4. to have a conviction that (a person or thing) is, has been, or will be engaged in a given action or involved in a given situation: The fugitive is believed to be headed for the Mexican border.

Another use of a measure of probability...

5. to suppose or assume; understand (usually fol. by a noun clause): I believe that he has left town.

Hurt badly by the underlined.

So I count 9 definitions and 1 potential match. That's an 89% chance of a definition of belief not matching any part of my character or thought processes.

You are just in denial.

I don't know how many times I can say the same thing before you get it. So I'll supersize it for you.

As I said earlier, the fact that you need to believe things prevents you seeing why other people don't. As I also said, the fact that I don't need to believe things prevents me from seeing why you do - but at least we accept that you do and move on.

Key phrase underlined.

I can no more understand why you have to have belief to survive than you seem to be able to understand that I don't. But I accept the fact that you do because it's simply not worth the effort to convince you that you don't, especially when you seem to be perfectly happy with it.

You have stated many things in the last month that would contradict your current position.

I'll echo danoff's statement at this point. Given that you have already quoted me as saying "thats weak" when I can't find any instance of that quote and me anywhere on the site, I don't hold out much hope.

Can we do something more fun now?

Oh please do. Anything. I'll even pray to a named supernatural deity of your choice. This has been covered before in this thread and, aside from being really, truly dull, it's about as far removed from the topic as we can get without talking about lemon flavoured jelly.

It's Creation vs. Evolution, not Let's Talk About danoff and Famine's Brains.

 

[UnoMOTO]

observance guys....observance. I call it like I see it

 

[SuperCobraJet]

My wife knows full well how I think. I'm a judgement call to her as well. We understand each other.Honsetly I didn't think Famine was right when he said that you guys could simply not comprehend a lack of belief. How wrong I was to doubt him.
Look if you're going to claim that I've said something that indicates I have a belief, the least you could do is try to back it up. I'm telling you right now that I don't. You can ask me about any of the things you think I have a belief in and I will tell you there is some doubt (except for the fact that I exist, I have no doubt about that).
If that's not the very definition of not having belief in something, I don't know what is.

It has already been proven to you that you have acted purposefully on at least two occasions in your life so far, and I'm confident you have done it numerous times.
By standardised and accepted definition you have done so on "belief". Yet in the face of this overwhelming evidence you insist upon denying you have done so.
I find that remarkable, however it is explainable. Referring back to earlier comments concerning human nature, that is what is at work here. The inability to admit when you are wrong.
BTW you can judge an action before or after you take it, but, once you are in the act, you are believing.
I would also add: No biggie, You would make a great politician.

 

[Danoff]

observance guys....observance. I call it like I see it

You called it wrong... we explained (several times). In general, it isn't usually a good idea to argue with someone about their own thoughts.

 

[Swift]

You would make a great politician

nope, he wouldn't. Because he would make everyone work for what they have and the black people(for some reason) would hate that.

 

[Danoff]

It has already been proven to you that you have acted purposefully on at least two occasions in your life so far, and I'm confident you have done it numerous times.
By standardised and accepted definition you have done so on "belief". Yet in the face of this overwhelming evidence you insist upon denying you have done so.
I find that remarkable, however it is explainable. Referring back to earlier comments concerning human nature, that is what is at work here. The inability to admit when you are wrong.

SCJ, I'm getting irritated at seeing the same thing over and over. I have explained several times how it is not possible that you are correct. I have given you examples in which YOU YOURSELF would act without belief (thereby proving that action!=belief). I told you specifically that I do not hold the things which you claim I believe in to be 100% true. That is - by definition - not belief. And you are unable to provide me with quotes showing that I hold a belief.

You lost, it's obvious, give up.

BTW you can judge an action before or after you take it, but, once you are in the act, you are believing.

I've proven this false... two or three times.

 

[UnoMOTO]

You called it wrong... we explained (several times). In general, it isn't usually a good idea to argue with someone about their own thoughts.

OH YA...try telling a smoker that he is not addicted to smoking. He doesn't think he is...but well...HE IS!

 

[Danoff]

OH YA...try telling a smoker that he is not addicted to smoking. He doesn't think he is...but well...HE IS!

That would be arguing about a physical medical condition, not a mental state. Try again.

 

[UnoMOTO]

That would be arguing about a physical medical condition, not a mental state. Try again.

come on friend...are much smarter then this. he THINKS he can quit at any time. Nice avoidence of the point:tup:

 

[Swift]

That would be arguing about a physical medical condition, not a mental state. Try again.

A person addicted to weed.

 

[Danoff]

come on friend...are much smarter then this. he THINKS he can quit at any time. Nice avoidence of the point:tup:

You're still missing it. He thinks his physical addiction is in one state, you think it is in another. That's not parellel to what's going on here.

You're arguing with me about what I think. Not whether what I think is correct. You're arguing that I believe. I'm arguing that I don't.

As I said, it's best not to argue with me about the contents of my own brain. I know what I think a hell of a lot better than you do.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

SCJ, I'm getting irritated at seeing the same thing over and over. I have explained several times how it is not possible that you are correct. I have given you examples in which YOU YOURSELF would act without belief (thereby proving that action!=belief). I told you specifically that I do not hold the things which you claim I believe in to be 100% true. That is - by definition - not belief. And you are unable to provide me with quotes showing that I hold a belief.

You lost, it's obvious, give up.

I've proven this false... two or three times.

Truly amazing!
Considering all the forgoing discussion, I can only conclude theres a glitch here somewhere and you are commenting from another thread.

Since its quite obvious at this point that conclusive proof is irrelevant to you and famine in forming your opinions the only suggestion I can make is to see if we can put this argument in a poll thread and maybe you would abide by the results of that. Are you game?

 

[UnoMOTO]

You're still missing it. He thinks his physical addiction is in one state, you think it is in another. That's not parellel to what's going on here.

You're arguing with me about what I think. Not whether what I think is correct. You're arguing that I believe. I'm arguing that I don't.

As I said, it's best not to argue with me about the contents of my own brain. I know what I think a hell of a lot better than you do.

I really can't explain myself any better. DING DING DING I'm tapping out of this belief, probability, faith, believe, trust, judgement, obersvation issue. I am not worthy.

 

[Danoff]

Truly amazing!
Considering all the forgoing discussion, I can only conclude theres a glitch here somewhere and you are commenting from another thread.

Nope.

Since its quite obvious at this point that conclusive proof is irrelevant to you and famine in forming your opinions the only suggestion I can make is to see if we can put this argument in a poll thread and maybe you would abide by the results of that. Are you game?

Why would abide by the results of a vote over whether or not I think something? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

There are two points, which I have made, which end this discussion.

1) Action does not require beleif. I have proven this rigorously with multiple examples which demonstrate that one does not always act on belief.

The next one is the biggie. This one's for all the marbles.

2) I cannot be said to believe something if I do not think it is 100% guaranteed truth.

See that second one there? That's the end of the discussion.

Do I think it is 100% guaranteed truth that Pako likes broccoli? No. Do I think it is likely? Yes. Likely enough to act on? yes.

Do I think it is 100% guaranteed truth that the sun will come up tomorrow? No. Do I think it is likely? Yes. Likely enough to not take action in preparation for the sun not coming up? Yes.

Do I think it is 100% guaranteed truth that evolution is correct? No. Do I think it is likely? Yes. Likely enough to live my life as though it were true? Yes.

Do I think it is 100% guaranteed truth that I exist? Yes.

That last one is belief. The rest is not. There is no argument here. There is no possible way to claim otherwise. You have no case to make.

I win. Let's move on.

 

[Pako]

Trust is a judgement on probability from available evidence. If the available evidence says that, more often than not, someone carries out acts contrary to their words then the probability is that they will do it again next time. If not, the probability is that they won't.

Each time they act, a mental analysis occurs which processes whether or not they are acting against their words and redetermines the probability.

# have confidence or faith in; "We can trust in God"; "Rely on your friends"; "bank on your good education"; "I swear by my grandmother's recipes"
# something (as property) held by one party (the trustee) for the benefit of another (the beneficiary); "he is the beneficiary of a generous trust set up by his father"
# reliance: certainty based on past experience; "he wrote the paper with considerable reliance on the work of other scientists"; "he put more trust in his own two legs than in the gun"
# allow without fear
# believe: be confident about something; "I believe that he will come back from the war"
# the trait of believing in the honesty and reliability of others; "the experience destroyed his trust and personal dignity"
# a consortium of independent organizations formed to limit competition by controlling the production and distribution of a product or service; "they set up the trust in the hope of gaining a monopoly"
# hope: expect and wish; "I trust you will behave better from now on"; "I hope she understands that she cannot expect a raise"
# faith: complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust"
# entrust: confer a trust upon; "The messenger was entrusted with the general's secret"; "I commit my soul to God"
# extend credit to
# confidence: a trustful relationship; "he took me into his confidence"; "he betrayed their trust"

Interesting.

Was it you Famine or danoff that said the dictionary was wrong in the past?

I trust their definition over yours.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Oh please do. Anything. I'll even pray to a named supernatural deity of your choice. This has been covered before in this thread and, aside from being really, truly dull, it's about as far removed from the topic as we can get without talking about lemon flavoured jelly. .

Wow I almost missed this one.
And I thought we weren't making any progress.
By all means, make it in the name of JESUS.
FAMINE is getting the hang of this thing. "You have not because you ask not."

 

[UnoMOTO]

All of this will become relivent when we get back in the the topic and all you guys can do is tell us that you think evolution is likely, but do not believe it to be true.

 

[Danoff]

All of this will become relivent when we get back in the the topic and all you guys can do is tell us that you think evolution is likely, but do not believe it to be true.

I agree with 03R1 here. This discussion is actually somewhat vital to the topic.

 

[Famine]

I trust their definition over yours.

Why?

Also note:

... confidence ... confidence ...

Confidence is a measure of probability in mathematics.

Trust is a judgement on probability from available evidence.

Would you trust someone who was previously trustworthy following an untrustworthy act? Explain why/why not.

 

[UnoMOTO]

I agree with 03R1 here. This discussion is actually somewhat vital to the topic.

cough...choke...sputter....can't breathe...getting dark, the end must be near.

 

[Pako]

Wow I almost missed this one.
And I thought we weren't making any progress.
By all means, make it in the name of JESUS.
FAMINE is getting the hang of this thing. "You have not because you ask not."

Ok, moving on now.... So yeah, I think "trust" and "belief" should be enforced by our public school system. Our government is loosing sight (or has lost sight) of integrity in their own actions. We should be able to trust our government. If we instill a value associated with trust then maybe the next generation will think twice before they do something that's not trust worthy.

What better example then using God as the example of trust to teach from.

 

[Danoff]

Ok, moving on now.... So yeah, I think "trust" and "belief" should be enforced by our public school system. Our government is loosing sight (or has lost sight) of integrity in their own actions. We should be able to trust our government. If we instill a value associated with trust then maybe the next generation will think twice before they do something that's not trust worthy.

What better example then using God as the example of trust to teach from.

Hopefully I'm not alone when I say... what??