Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course...considerations of the position on The Scale of Probability that ideas/concepts/info have is gonna be factored in when making assessments.
Another question will be...exactly what position on that scale does each idea, concept, or information hold?
So...there can be questions about the questions...that are greatly subjective & arbitrary.
Part of why distilling the truth is not as easy as you would like, but doable nevertheless.
Of course.
I was a Atheist...and had been since I was able to make a reasonable consideration of the matter.
I saw Mystics offerings here...I inquired of him. He took the time to explain his ideas & concepts.
I always believed that God(s) were limited to the Deities and Creatures written of in ancient Theological & Mythological texts...and that they obviously did not exist except as representative characters in those writings.
Mystic hipped me to the fact that "God" is not limited to just that...and I came to greater knowledge & understanding.
I did not adopt his Panentheistic Theism, but perceived the existence of God through a very basic & generic Pantheistic concept.
But I do not completely dismiss the hypothetical concepts he proposes...and I feel they have more than enough merit to warrant greater research and study.
Sure seems to me that if anyone argues the existence of a god in any way, you "feel they have more than enough merit to warrant greater research and study." Given all the arguments I've heard over my many decades of doing so, I'm inclined to feel the opposite. I'm more attracted to arguments that are based on something a bit more substantive in terms of facts, evidence and truth that can be substantiated, but then again we all know this. Sometimes I think this is worth repeating anyway.
I guess, technically, you could say that ^^^^ about any hypothesis...no matter what it is.
So...you dismiss everything that is hypothetical?
If everyone did that...that would be a serious impediment to any research.
If I may...
I think it is more a matter of clearly distinguishing what is hypothetical from what is not. Then too if the mood strikes and time allows, there is consideration as to likelihood the hypothesis has merit and/or to what extent. The problem too many people are inclined to make is to espouse hypothesis as if it has more merit than it does. To the point of promoting pure hypothesis as if it is the truth. A problem we humans have been promoting and perpetuating ever since we began our ability to develop a hypothesis, about everything and anything.
I guess, technically, you could say that ^^^^ about any hypothesis...no matter what it is.
So...you dismiss everything that is hypothetical?
If everyone did that...that would be a serious impediment to any research.
No, you could say that about any hypothesis.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
