I’ve always said that the only honest view of God is that I don’t know if he/she/it exists. I can never prove it either way and I don’t study to try. Some days, I think I believe; other days, I don’t. But definitive scientific evidence either way is impossible, as it should be. It would impoverish religion, and remove faith, if it could be proven. Faith is necessary to religion.
Thanks for the comment. My view is this: Scientific evidence is public. Personal experience evidence is private. Both are evidence though. Science prioritises the public which is inappropriate for both God and Love.
I’m not sure that stated personal experience is always evidence. People can lie to try to bamboozle others, or be delusional. But religion isn’t an evidence based activity anyway. It’s based purely on belief, which is why I struggle with it and am so skeptical.
I agree that personal evidence isn’t public, peer reviewed evidence ie science. Nonetheless if the experiencer is sincere (how do we know who is delusional and who isn't) then it is evidence for the experiencer themselves. Thus when they say God exists it isn’t merely faith, but they have a genuine, solid reason to believe.
Dear readers the next part of God Fortnight is out: https://danielclarkeserret.substack.com/p/science-and-the-inductive-challenge?r=2bk821
I’ve always said that the only honest view of God is that I don’t know if he/she/it exists. I can never prove it either way and I don’t study to try. Some days, I think I believe; other days, I don’t. But definitive scientific evidence either way is impossible, as it should be. It would impoverish religion, and remove faith, if it could be proven. Faith is necessary to religion.
Thanks for the comment. My view is this: Scientific evidence is public. Personal experience evidence is private. Both are evidence though. Science prioritises the public which is inappropriate for both God and Love.
I’m not sure that stated personal experience is always evidence. People can lie to try to bamboozle others, or be delusional. But religion isn’t an evidence based activity anyway. It’s based purely on belief, which is why I struggle with it and am so skeptical.
I agree that personal evidence isn’t public, peer reviewed evidence ie science. Nonetheless if the experiencer is sincere (how do we know who is delusional and who isn't) then it is evidence for the experiencer themselves. Thus when they say God exists it isn’t merely faith, but they have a genuine, solid reason to believe.
I don’t doubt other people’s beliefs. My only objection is to making laws based on them, as theocrats of all stripes are wont to do.