From: rhinoceros (rhinoceros@freemail.gr)
Date: Fri Oct 24 2003 - 18:45:39 MDT
[Lucifer]
What kind of implications does this study have? I'm inclined to take this as evidence against the existence of certain classes of gods through the use of modus tollens (mentioned on another thread recently).
Something along the lines of:
1. If God exists, then God answers prayers.
2. If God answers prayers, then prayers make a difference.
3. Prayers don't make a difference. (results of the study)
4. Therefore God does not exist.
Of course a theist could dispute any of the premises, maybe God doesn't answer prayers. Maybe prayers aren't supposed to make a difference. Maybe the study is flawed. If the study is flawed, it should be possible to point out exactly why. If the theist is forced to retreat on either of the first two premises, that would be interesting too as it clarifies what they believe and what kind of claims they can make.
[rhinoceros]
Heh... I'll try to play this game.
What do we have to assume for this syllogism to be valid? I think that most religions have thought of this and covered their bases.
(1) "If God exists, then God answers prayers."
This one would realy leave a god open to many tests if advocated by a religion, especially if it demands a *consistent* behavior from God. The religions I know about usually leave an escape hatch, such as "God doesn't intervene" or "God has its own plans and is not inclined to doing personal favors, except when he thinks a miracle is in order".
(2) "If God answers prayers, then prayers make a difference."
I think this can be assumed for all gods who do answer prayers (if not omnipotence, they should at least have some lesser potency). However, some would object to what exactly that difference would be. They would say "You don't always get what you want". So, their bases are covered here.
(3) "Prayers don't make a difference. (results of the study)"
Even if this study is invalid, we can always find other cases where prayers have not been answered, either in a personal level or statistically. However, if we want a true statement of fact, statement (3) should be:
(3.a) "At least sometimes, prayers don't make a difference"
Because of this, the previous statements should be universally true for the syllogism to be valid.
The weak link is only statement (1), but I think religions have been careful to avoid putting themselves in a corner.
---- This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29571> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 24 2003 - 18:45:50 MDT