Title: % chance of god existing
Post by: Piemaster on June 04, 2007, 10:29:53 AM
Post by: Piemaster on June 04, 2007, 10:29:53 AM
Looking at the question of god mathematically for a moment, what do you think the % chance is of some kind of god existing (in the way that most people would define a god)? And if there is something out there, what are the % chances that it:
a) Conforms approximately to the beliefs of some known religion (i.e. the Christian God exists or Allah exists etc).
b) Conforms to no known religion, but nevertheless fits the definition of a god.
Obviously this is completely opinion based and so there is no right or wrong answer, so I would be interested in hearing everyone's opinion.
However, I reserve the right to pour slight scorn on responses of 0% or 100%.
a) Conforms approximately to the beliefs of some known religion (i.e. the Christian God exists or Allah exists etc).
b) Conforms to no known religion, but nevertheless fits the definition of a god.
Obviously this is completely opinion based and so there is no right or wrong answer, so I would be interested in hearing everyone's opinion.
However, I reserve the right to pour slight scorn on responses of 0% or 100%.
Title: Re: % chance of god existing
Post by: Woody on June 05, 2007, 02:29:42 AM
Post by: Woody on June 05, 2007, 02:29:42 AM
Quote from: "Piemaster"...Obviously this is completely opinion based and so there is no right or wrong answer, so I would be interested in hearing everyone's opinion.
However, I reserve the right to pour slight scorn on responses of 0% or 100%.
Hi, Piemaster. I'm not sure what the right answer might be but I disagree about there being no <i>wrong</I> answer. The wrong answer is <I>100%</I>, 100%. :-)
Haven't been around here much for some time. It's nice to see some other Brits here.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on June 05, 2007, 03:48:15 AM
Post by: SteveS on June 05, 2007, 03:48:15 AM
I'm game.
a) Since I belief there to be no solid evidence of a god, and all god myths are basically created without any real knowledge of god, I believe this to be so close to 0% as makes no difference. (I know - I'm risking the scorn :wink: )
b) I think everyone, upon discovering a god like this, would argue that it does in fact fit their description of god according to their religion. But, let's put that aside. Like question a) above, I think our concept of god is uninformed, so it's going to be unlikely that anything god-like is really god-like (if you catch my drift). Still, since this one leaves the door more open, let me answer "approaching 0". >0%
Honestly, this is how I see this question. Without knowledge, their can be only speculation. What chance does this sort of wild speculation have of being right?
About 0 :smile:
a) Since I belief there to be no solid evidence of a god, and all god myths are basically created without any real knowledge of god, I believe this to be so close to 0% as makes no difference. (I know - I'm risking the scorn :wink: )
b) I think everyone, upon discovering a god like this, would argue that it does in fact fit their description of god according to their religion. But, let's put that aside. Like question a) above, I think our concept of god is uninformed, so it's going to be unlikely that anything god-like is really god-like (if you catch my drift). Still, since this one leaves the door more open, let me answer "approaching 0". >0%
Honestly, this is how I see this question. Without knowledge, their can be only speculation. What chance does this sort of wild speculation have of being right?
About 0 :smile:
Title:
Post by: donkeyhoty on June 05, 2007, 04:05:55 AM
Post by: donkeyhoty on June 05, 2007, 04:05:55 AM
A: 0.1%, there are a lot of religions out there, one of them could be right.... Just like I could go out to my car and find a $100 bill on the ground.
B: Well, if you've seen the film Stargate, or the Stargate TV shows(yeah, I'm a loser), an advanced civilization could be mistaken for gods... Just as we are, essentially, gods to the ants. Although, the ants don't have the capability of worshipping us..... or do they?
Edit: I didn't give a second percentage. 1.5%
B: Well, if you've seen the film Stargate, or the Stargate TV shows(yeah, I'm a loser), an advanced civilization could be mistaken for gods... Just as we are, essentially, gods to the ants. Although, the ants don't have the capability of worshipping us..... or do they?
Edit: I didn't give a second percentage. 1.5%
Title:
Post by: Will on June 05, 2007, 04:11:31 AM
Post by: Will on June 05, 2007, 04:11:31 AM
1 to the -1,000,000,000 power, or a fraction of 1 over 1 to the negative 1 billionth power.
Title:
Post by: tacoma_kyle on June 05, 2007, 05:02:29 AM
Post by: tacoma_kyle on June 05, 2007, 05:02:29 AM
I'm ganna nitpick you Will...haha
1 to the 1st power = 1 --->1^(1) = 1
1 to the 9348594375689------>1^(9348594375689) = 1
Meaning there is god?
Haha you just missed the zero after the 1 or to state 'to the power of 10.' Actually I am kinda confused...power. Its used kinda weird sometimes...
1 to the 1st power = 1 --->1^(1) = 1
1 to the 9348594375689------>1^(9348594375689) = 1
Meaning there is god?
Haha you just missed the zero after the 1 or to state 'to the power of 10.' Actually I am kinda confused...power. Its used kinda weird sometimes...
Title:
Post by: Eclecticsaturn on June 05, 2007, 06:29:02 AM
Post by: Eclecticsaturn on June 05, 2007, 06:29:02 AM
50/50. Its does or doesnt. I surely dont believe there is a god, but the fact still remains that there either is, or isnt one.
Title:
Post by: Piemaster on June 05, 2007, 06:48:08 AM
Post by: Piemaster on June 05, 2007, 06:48:08 AM
The reason I am asking this question is that I have a theory that rational odds-making goes out of the window when dealing with religion. Because being a member of a religion is so stigmatised (for better or worse), and because major religions frown upon uncertainty, people tend towards either 100% or 0% as answers, but more through hope and a preconceived notion that they should have conviction in their beliefs than through objective judgement.
Given that there are smart people on both sides of the debate, it is only reasonable to assume that the existance of some kind of god in the universe is far from an open and shut case. Even the most devout member of a religion or the most staunch atheist should have a part of them that is willing to challenge their own preconceived notions. In effect, the agnostics (which is probably the least fashionable belief system) are probably the most rational of us all. They are at least acknowledging that there is room to argue on both sides of the debate and so are unwilling to put themselves definitively in one camp or other.
Incidently, I consider myself an atheist rather than agnostic, because my own beliefs are heavily skewed (maybe overly so?) in the favour of a godless universe. However, by most atheists standards maybe I am an agnostic. My own probabilities would be approximately:
No god - 95%
One religion is broadly right - 0.5%
God exists, but not any specific religion's - 4.5%
Many of us atheists were formerly religious. Many non-religious people 'discover' God. Yet most follow blindly into their new belief system as blindly as they followed their old one. If you are going to travel from A to Z, shouldn't you travel through the rest of the alphabet first?
Given that there are smart people on both sides of the debate, it is only reasonable to assume that the existance of some kind of god in the universe is far from an open and shut case. Even the most devout member of a religion or the most staunch atheist should have a part of them that is willing to challenge their own preconceived notions. In effect, the agnostics (which is probably the least fashionable belief system) are probably the most rational of us all. They are at least acknowledging that there is room to argue on both sides of the debate and so are unwilling to put themselves definitively in one camp or other.
Incidently, I consider myself an atheist rather than agnostic, because my own beliefs are heavily skewed (maybe overly so?) in the favour of a godless universe. However, by most atheists standards maybe I am an agnostic. My own probabilities would be approximately:
No god - 95%
One religion is broadly right - 0.5%
God exists, but not any specific religion's - 4.5%
Many of us atheists were formerly religious. Many non-religious people 'discover' God. Yet most follow blindly into their new belief system as blindly as they followed their old one. If you are going to travel from A to Z, shouldn't you travel through the rest of the alphabet first?
Title:
Post by: SteveS on June 05, 2007, 05:50:06 PM
Post by: SteveS on June 05, 2007, 05:50:06 PM
Good post Piemaster - I hear your argument. Just a few comments.
I think the problem with listing percentages is that there is insufficient evidence for "rational odds-making". 95%, for example, is exactly 1 in 20. How did you come up with such a precise number? From what evidence? And how was this rationally determined? This is my only point with making odds on a question like this.
A common theme of mine is that I believe gods to be imagined by people. Looking through our history shows us that people have invented gods, over and over again. Over time gods are discarded, and new gods are created. While our gods are probably created for many reasons, they always seem to be defended rationally with an appeal to unexplained phenomena in the natural world.
A good example of this would be a rain god. Why does it rain sometimes, not other times? Is there some way we can make it rain when we want it to rain? So, presto, we made a rain god - do a rain dance, maybe it will rain (if we are currently in favor with the rain god). What percentage chance do you think there is of any rain gods being real? Not too likely, right, maybe approaching 0 is too kind? Okay - here's another example of this: god as the "uncreated creator of the universe". Again - a phenomena, in nature, that we can't explain (existence of, well, existence itself). So - presto, we've got a god concept to explain this. Seeing the similarity, my mind wonders why god as "creator of the cosmos" is any different then "god who makes it rain". What evidence do we have that distinguishes between these two ideas of god? Doesn't seem like much to me. But since we've defined god as "creator of existence", what if we find something that did create existence, only it was a type of Boson or something, or a quantum fluctuation, or ... well, you get my drift. Would this qualify as "god" to anyone? I think not, so again I go with "approaching zero".
So - what if there is something undoubtedly god-like: a personality. What if it's not supernatural? Again - is this god? What if there is a supernatural personality god-like thing --- if there is, at the current time there seems to be no real evidence as to what this thing is or what it's like, so all our concepts of god seem uninformed to me. So what possible chance do we have of being right? Blind luck. Since 1% is 1 in 100, and there are far more than 100 speculations as to what god is or what god is like, the chance of any of them being right seems far less then 1% right out of the box. So again, I'm going with "approaching 0". Personally, if any god does exists, I think the deists are most likely to have it right mainly because they have such a hazy concept of god, as opposed to a more narrow definition like you find in polytheistic religions (rain-god, thunder-god, sky-god, sea-god, sun-god, moon-god etc. I don't think it's unfair to assign these a >0% chance of existing. It can't be identically zero because they can't be shown to be impossible - but that's not much to hang your hat on).
None of my answer are precise --- they are qualitative, because I think I have insufficient evidence to quantify them.
Anyway, good post, this was fun to think about. I hope my mental rambling explains how I came up with my answer (or, at least explains what's wrong with my brain :wink: ).
I think the problem with listing percentages is that there is insufficient evidence for "rational odds-making". 95%, for example, is exactly 1 in 20. How did you come up with such a precise number? From what evidence? And how was this rationally determined? This is my only point with making odds on a question like this.
A common theme of mine is that I believe gods to be imagined by people. Looking through our history shows us that people have invented gods, over and over again. Over time gods are discarded, and new gods are created. While our gods are probably created for many reasons, they always seem to be defended rationally with an appeal to unexplained phenomena in the natural world.
A good example of this would be a rain god. Why does it rain sometimes, not other times? Is there some way we can make it rain when we want it to rain? So, presto, we made a rain god - do a rain dance, maybe it will rain (if we are currently in favor with the rain god). What percentage chance do you think there is of any rain gods being real? Not too likely, right, maybe approaching 0 is too kind? Okay - here's another example of this: god as the "uncreated creator of the universe". Again - a phenomena, in nature, that we can't explain (existence of, well, existence itself). So - presto, we've got a god concept to explain this. Seeing the similarity, my mind wonders why god as "creator of the cosmos" is any different then "god who makes it rain". What evidence do we have that distinguishes between these two ideas of god? Doesn't seem like much to me. But since we've defined god as "creator of existence", what if we find something that did create existence, only it was a type of Boson or something, or a quantum fluctuation, or ... well, you get my drift. Would this qualify as "god" to anyone? I think not, so again I go with "approaching zero".
So - what if there is something undoubtedly god-like: a personality. What if it's not supernatural? Again - is this god? What if there is a supernatural personality god-like thing --- if there is, at the current time there seems to be no real evidence as to what this thing is or what it's like, so all our concepts of god seem uninformed to me. So what possible chance do we have of being right? Blind luck. Since 1% is 1 in 100, and there are far more than 100 speculations as to what god is or what god is like, the chance of any of them being right seems far less then 1% right out of the box. So again, I'm going with "approaching 0". Personally, if any god does exists, I think the deists are most likely to have it right mainly because they have such a hazy concept of god, as opposed to a more narrow definition like you find in polytheistic religions (rain-god, thunder-god, sky-god, sea-god, sun-god, moon-god etc. I don't think it's unfair to assign these a >0% chance of existing. It can't be identically zero because they can't be shown to be impossible - but that's not much to hang your hat on).
None of my answer are precise --- they are qualitative, because I think I have insufficient evidence to quantify them.
Anyway, good post, this was fun to think about. I hope my mental rambling explains how I came up with my answer (or, at least explains what's wrong with my brain :wink: ).
Title:
Post by: Will on June 05, 2007, 08:23:20 PM
Post by: Will on June 05, 2007, 08:23:20 PM
Quote from: "tacoma_kyle"I'm ganna nitpick you Will...hahaGood point. I've been out of Maths for a while now.
1 to the 1st power = 1 --->1^(1) = 1
1 to the 9348594375689------>1^(9348594375689) = 1
Meaning there is god?
Haha you just missed the zero after the 1 or to state 'to the power of 10.' Actually I am kinda confused...power. Its used kinda weird sometimes...
How about 10 to the -1,000,000,000 power? The idea is to present a number so close to zero that considering it's value as more than zero is really useless.
God almost certainly doesn't exist. Putting it into numbers, to me, seems an exercise in futility.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on June 06, 2007, 05:29:12 AM
Post by: SteveS on June 06, 2007, 05:29:12 AM
Yeah, that's my thought exactly, Will. The best way I could describe it is "approaching zero". (shrugs)
Title:
Post by: tacoma_kyle on June 06, 2007, 07:35:28 AM
Post by: tacoma_kyle on June 06, 2007, 07:35:28 AM
Quote from: "Willravel"Good point. I've been out of Maths for a while now.
How about 10 to the -1,000,000,000 power? The idea is to present a number so close to zero that considering it's value as more than zero is really useless.
God almost certainly doesn't exist. Putting it into numbers, to me, seems an exercise in futility.
God is like the sequence a^(n)/(n!). At the first few values it seems promising...gods power grows as the sequence grows...but when you calculate the limit as it approaches infinity, it is zero.
lol but I just never really registered it for some reason. So you arent doin too bad.
Title:
Post by: joeactor on June 06, 2007, 03:50:02 PM
Post by: joeactor on June 06, 2007, 03:50:02 PM
meh... angels... pins... dancing...
God is the quantum state. He IS and ISN'T at the same time, and until he's revealed his state remains unknown and unknowable...
Agnostic - the definitive choice of I don't know what.
Same as it ever was,
JoeActor
God is the quantum state. He IS and ISN'T at the same time, and until he's revealed his state remains unknown and unknowable...
Agnostic - the definitive choice of I don't know what.
Same as it ever was,
JoeActor
Title:
Post by: McQ on June 06, 2007, 08:22:48 PM
Post by: McQ on June 06, 2007, 08:22:48 PM
Quote from: "joeactor"meh... angels... pins... dancing...
God is the quantum state. He IS and ISN'T at the same time, and until he's revealed his state remains unknown and unknowable...
Agnostic - the definitive choice of I don't know what.
Same as it ever was,
JoeActor
Now that's well put!
Title:
Post by: pjkeeley on June 07, 2007, 04:34:51 AM
Post by: pjkeeley on June 07, 2007, 04:34:51 AM
QuoteA common theme of mine is that I believe gods to be imagined by people. Looking through our history shows us that people have invented gods, over and over again. Over time gods are discarded, and new gods are created. While our gods are probably created for many reasons, they always seem to be defended rationally with an appeal to unexplained phenomena in the natural world.Awesome! This is a fantastic argument. I'd never thought to compare 'god who made the cosmos' to 'god who made it rain'. I'm so using this from now on!
A good example of this would be a rain god. Why does it rain sometimes, not other times? Is there some way we can make it rain when we want it to rain? So, presto, we made a rain god - do a rain dance, maybe it will rain (if we are currently in favor with the rain god). What percentage chance do you think there is of any rain gods being real? Not too likely, right, maybe approaching 0 is too kind? Okay - here's another example of this: god as the "uncreated creator of the universe". Again - a phenomena, in nature, that we can't explain (existence of, well, existence itself). So - presto, we've got a god concept to explain this. Seeing the similarity, my mind wonders why god as "creator of the cosmos" is any different then "god who makes it rain". What evidence do we have that distinguishes between these two ideas of god? Doesn't seem like much to me. But since we've defined god as "creator of existence", what if we find something that did create existence, only it was a type of Boson or something, or a quantum fluctuation, or ... well, you get my drift. Would this qualify as "god" to anyone?
Plus I just love how Christians HATE being compared to paganism.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on June 07, 2007, 05:49:35 AM
Post by: SteveS on June 07, 2007, 05:49:35 AM
Thanks for the kind words pj. This is just the way it seems to me, personally. It's really just the old "god of the gaps" argument. I think our forum admin laetusatheos expressed the same idea in a really clever way with this comment on another thread (http://www.happyatheistforum.com/fpost6671.html#6671). In particular, "God used to live up in the clouds now he lives outside of time." Yup - God of the gaps :wink: .
Title:
Post by: Whitney on June 09, 2007, 02:08:28 AM
Post by: Whitney on June 09, 2007, 02:08:28 AM
a) 0%...Most defined gods are simply too absurd to exist; I'm really not sure how anyone who gives much thought to them can think they make sense.
b) a general concept of god is so vague that it could mean the universe...so I'll say it is rather likely that something exists which a lot of people would feel comfortable calling a god if they knew it was what caused everything to exist...even if it didn't have any personal attributes. As for what I'd call a god; I think anything worthy of the title god should be a being that is personally involved with it's creation...the evidence for such a being is non-existant; so 0%.
b) a general concept of god is so vague that it could mean the universe...so I'll say it is rather likely that something exists which a lot of people would feel comfortable calling a god if they knew it was what caused everything to exist...even if it didn't have any personal attributes. As for what I'd call a god; I think anything worthy of the title god should be a being that is personally involved with it's creation...the evidence for such a being is non-existant; so 0%.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on June 10, 2007, 05:31:46 PM
Post by: SteveS on June 10, 2007, 05:31:46 PM
Quote from: "laetusatheos"a) 0%
Quote from: "laetusatheos"b) .... so 0%.Nice - no screwing around, just go for the big ol' donut.
Title:
Post by: JustInterested on July 12, 2007, 03:45:48 AM
Post by: JustInterested on July 12, 2007, 03:45:48 AM
So youre saying there's a chance!
Some of you have faith as small as a mustard seed
Some of you have faith as small as a mustard seed
Title:
Post by: Whitney on July 14, 2007, 05:45:02 PM
Post by: Whitney on July 14, 2007, 05:45:02 PM
Quote from: "JustInterested"Some of you have faith as small as a mustard seed
Then why can't they move mountains :wink:
Title:
Post by: SteveS on July 18, 2007, 03:17:13 AM
Post by: SteveS on July 18, 2007, 03:17:13 AM
My mustard seed has a size approaching zero (hahaha!)
Title:
Post by: areUreallyConvinced on July 22, 2007, 07:05:05 PM
Post by: areUreallyConvinced on July 22, 2007, 07:05:05 PM
Depends on what u really mean by god if as in b) a creator for the universe i would say it is a 50:50 chance with the same logic as Eclecticsaturn.
But when it comes to a) a specific god as in Islam Christianity etc i would have to say a zero percent. Personal gods just don't make any sense they are always self contradictory, it would be the equivalent of asking what are the chances of having a 2 headed animal that has no heads. Just my 2 cents.
Areo
But when it comes to a) a specific god as in Islam Christianity etc i would have to say a zero percent. Personal gods just don't make any sense they are always self contradictory, it would be the equivalent of asking what are the chances of having a 2 headed animal that has no heads. Just my 2 cents.
Areo
Title:
Post by: Spoonboy on August 16, 2007, 05:32:20 PM
Post by: Spoonboy on August 16, 2007, 05:32:20 PM
Quote from: "tacoma_kyle"God is like the sequence a^(n)/(n!). At the first few values it seems promising...gods power grows as the sequence grows...but when you calculate the limit as it approaches infinity, it is zero.
This post gave me an idea for a way to show the probability that God exists is 0%. The Conjunction Fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_fallacy) basically says that if you have a proposition and you then you add an extra condition, the probability of it being true can only decrease or stay the same. Let's start by defining P1 to be the probability that "there exists a powerful being". Now let P2 be the probability that "there exists a powerful being AND he can read". Clearly P2 <= P1. Now let P3 be the probability that "there exists a powerful being AND he can read AND he understands the theory of relativity". Clearly P3 <= P2 <= P1.
Now God is just a powerful being that knows everything, loves everyone and can do anything. If we assume there are an infinite amount of things God can do, and know, then the proposition that God Exists is quite clearly an infinite list of conditions all ANDed together. With an infinite list of conditions, the probability will continually decrease with each condition added, except when the condition added is a logical consequence of one of the previous conditions. Unless there comes a point when that is always the case, the probability will decrease forever, and will therefore be zero.
Title:
Post by: rlrose328 on August 17, 2007, 01:07:52 AM
Post by: rlrose328 on August 17, 2007, 01:07:52 AM
The chances of a god existing are so minute, I no longer waste my time on entertaining the possibility.
Title:
Post by: SteveS on August 17, 2007, 07:32:28 PM
Post by: SteveS on August 17, 2007, 07:32:28 PM
Hi Spoonboy - I like your conjunction fallacy - it appeals to me, and I think it has teeth when attacking the "god idea" proposed by the typical theologian, that god is omni-everything. I think the idea of an omni-everything being is self-contradictory, impossible, and therefore clearly false. I am a "strong atheist" in regard to this idea of god.
Like rlrose328, I think the chances of a god are small enough that I can safely ignore them. If there is god, then I think none of us have the first clue what this god is like. So why believe there is? It's just an unsupportable possibility.
Like rlrose328, I think the chances of a god are small enough that I can safely ignore them. If there is god, then I think none of us have the first clue what this god is like. So why believe there is? It's just an unsupportable possibility.
Title:
Post by: Ninja Donkey on August 17, 2007, 09:36:25 PM
Post by: Ninja Donkey on August 17, 2007, 09:36:25 PM
mathematical, eh?
I have a roommate with a BA in mathematics
I'll have to run this by her and see what she thinks of it.
I have a roommate with a BA in mathematics
I'll have to run this by her and see what she thinks of it.