Do you believe in God? Are you an atheist? Are you agnostic? All that irrelevant as far as I'm concerned - particularly in light of these new "Atheist" Buses that are hitting the streets of England. 1. All I'm concerned with is that you be a believer in Logic (call it "being logical"), and a believer that one should proudly hold to their beliefs/opinions/faiths (not stubbornly that is... just, if you feel one way as opposed to another, don't be ashamed of it, and cower away.)
I see two fundamental mistakes in the assertion of these "Atheist" buses - one which, regardless of views and beliefs, frustrates me - particularly when the campaign was backed by some high-profiled people. People with a university education, people with PhDs, people who should be able to spot a logical error when they see it.
The ads on the buses assert the following: There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
So what - outside of any metaphysical questions - is wrong with the above assertion? To me, that assertion is no different than the following:
Semi-hard cheeses will probably last 4 days unrefridgerated. Now stop worrying and go play baseball.
The immediately obvious point that arises is - what does cheese have to do with my ability to play baseball? Also, I don't think I was particularly worried whether semi-hard cheeses last 4 days outside of the fridge. The two are mutually exclusive ideas that could only possibly be conected with some large back story... I bought some cheeses, and brought them home. I was in a rush to meet my friends on the diamond, so I forgot to put the cheeses in the fridge. I quickly grabbed my glove and bat and headed out on to the diamond. The pitcher makes a joke that I called cheesy. I remembered the cheeses throwing off my ability to play ball. My friend reassured me that the cheeses can last up to 4 days, and to get my head in the game. I proceeded to then hit the game winning grand-slam.
In the same way... The premise: There probably is no God, has little to do with worrying or enjoying life. For some, sure - there may be some people who are burdened by their religious beliefs to the point that they can't function in society. But there is no direct correlation - that is, just because one may believe in God, does not mean they are worrying and not enjoying life (for proof, contact your local new-age, spiritual hippie and see how happy they are.)
I even learned of this logical error in high school. I even remember the scenario: The baseball game was cancelled last time because it rained. Today it is raining, therefor the baseball game will be cancelled. The issue though, is that rain isn't the exact reason for the game being cancelled. There are a number of other unmentioned variables. How hard is the rain? How muddy is the outfield? Is there a dome covering this field? Etc.
There's another issue though. Here's the ad's assertion again - see if you can spot the otther issue: There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
Probably. Probably? Imagine if the ad said: "There is no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." As a friend of mine pointed out, Probably makes it sound like there is some actual probability associated with the existence of a god - as in a numerical value, in which the assertion is saying that numerical value is less than 50%. In other words, there's a 45% chance that there is no God... That's folly.
The word Probably comes off as a little smug - in any usage. "You probably won't win." or "She'll probably break his heart."
With Probably, you are hinting that you are privy to a set of knowledge that others are unaware of. There's something you know, and you're not quite telling us. Otherwise, if you're not aware of some facts, how can you make the assertion of probability? For example, maybe you said "She'll probably break his heart" because you know she is cheating on him. You don't know for a fact that she'll be breaking his heart, maybe he won't be heart broken at all. But you throw in "probably" because, for one, you know something others don't, but also to cover your own ass in case he doesn't get heart broken.
Saying "There's probably no God" is not, in fact, an assertion. It's a rationalization. It's saying that rather than stick to a statement absent of "probabilities," you are going to cover your ass by rationalizing so that you can continue doing what you're doing. The point of rationalizing is simply that, if ever you turn out to be wrong, you can explain your rationalization and in hopes put off your own fault of being wrong.
For example, your boss asks you: "when will the project be done?" Do you say: "Probably next week" or do you say "Next week" Most people, I'm sure, would use a "probably" as it affords more time. It would be too bold to say "Next week"
As an open question I'll end with this: Who would you respect more? The employee who says "Probably next week" or the one who says "Next week"?
I see two fundamental mistakes in the assertion of these "Atheist" buses - one which, regardless of views and beliefs, frustrates me - particularly when the campaign was backed by some high-profiled people. People with a university education, people with PhDs, people who should be able to spot a logical error when they see it.
The ads on the buses assert the following: There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
So what - outside of any metaphysical questions - is wrong with the above assertion? To me, that assertion is no different than the following:
Semi-hard cheeses will probably last 4 days unrefridgerated. Now stop worrying and go play baseball.
The immediately obvious point that arises is - what does cheese have to do with my ability to play baseball? Also, I don't think I was particularly worried whether semi-hard cheeses last 4 days outside of the fridge. The two are mutually exclusive ideas that could only possibly be conected with some large back story... I bought some cheeses, and brought them home. I was in a rush to meet my friends on the diamond, so I forgot to put the cheeses in the fridge. I quickly grabbed my glove and bat and headed out on to the diamond. The pitcher makes a joke that I called cheesy. I remembered the cheeses throwing off my ability to play ball. My friend reassured me that the cheeses can last up to 4 days, and to get my head in the game. I proceeded to then hit the game winning grand-slam.
In the same way... The premise: There probably is no God, has little to do with worrying or enjoying life. For some, sure - there may be some people who are burdened by their religious beliefs to the point that they can't function in society. But there is no direct correlation - that is, just because one may believe in God, does not mean they are worrying and not enjoying life (for proof, contact your local new-age, spiritual hippie and see how happy they are.)
I even learned of this logical error in high school. I even remember the scenario: The baseball game was cancelled last time because it rained. Today it is raining, therefor the baseball game will be cancelled. The issue though, is that rain isn't the exact reason for the game being cancelled. There are a number of other unmentioned variables. How hard is the rain? How muddy is the outfield? Is there a dome covering this field? Etc.
There's another issue though. Here's the ad's assertion again - see if you can spot the otther issue: There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
Probably. Probably? Imagine if the ad said: "There is no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." As a friend of mine pointed out, Probably makes it sound like there is some actual probability associated with the existence of a god - as in a numerical value, in which the assertion is saying that numerical value is less than 50%. In other words, there's a 45% chance that there is no God... That's folly.
The word Probably comes off as a little smug - in any usage. "You probably won't win." or "She'll probably break his heart."
With Probably, you are hinting that you are privy to a set of knowledge that others are unaware of. There's something you know, and you're not quite telling us. Otherwise, if you're not aware of some facts, how can you make the assertion of probability? For example, maybe you said "She'll probably break his heart" because you know she is cheating on him. You don't know for a fact that she'll be breaking his heart, maybe he won't be heart broken at all. But you throw in "probably" because, for one, you know something others don't, but also to cover your own ass in case he doesn't get heart broken.
Saying "There's probably no God" is not, in fact, an assertion. It's a rationalization. It's saying that rather than stick to a statement absent of "probabilities," you are going to cover your ass by rationalizing so that you can continue doing what you're doing. The point of rationalizing is simply that, if ever you turn out to be wrong, you can explain your rationalization and in hopes put off your own fault of being wrong.
For example, your boss asks you: "when will the project be done?" Do you say: "Probably next week" or do you say "Next week" Most people, I'm sure, would use a "probably" as it affords more time. It would be too bold to say "Next week"
As an open question I'll end with this: Who would you respect more? The employee who says "Probably next week" or the one who says "Next week"?
ENJOY THIS ARTICLE? Be sure to ARC this article, and increase it's visibility to other readers You must be signed in to use this feature. |          | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
