• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

God of the Gaps

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument
Usage in referring to a type of argument

The term God-of-the-gaps fallacy can refer to a position that assumes an act of God as the explanation for an unknown phenomenon, which is a variant of an argument from ignorance fallacy.[13][14] Such an argument is sometimes reduced to the following form:

*There is a gap in understanding of some aspect of the natural world.
*Therefore the cause must be supernatural.​

One example of such an argument, which uses God as an explanation of one of the current gaps in biological science, is as follows: "Because current science can't figure out exactly how life started, it must be God who caused life to start." Critics of intelligent design creationism, for example, have accused proponents of using this basic type of argument.[15]

God-of-the-gaps arguments have been discouraged by some theologians who assert that such arguments tend to relegate God to the leftovers of science: as scientific knowledge increases, the dominion of God decreases.[4][5][16][17]

ie,
If-theres-no-God1.jpg
 
Last edited:

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
26,450
Reaction score
23,051
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Interesting subject, but "God of the Gaps" has multiple contexts. What is it you really want to debate here?

We can call the whole thing bogus, as in an example of a thought exercise that terminates with more questions than answers but we are talking about a fairly common human theme to explain something outside of what science tells us.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument


ie,
If-theres-no-God1.jpg

This is a giant strawman. No theologian argues "we don't know, therefore God". Our knowledge level is irrelevant to the argument.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This is a giant strawman. No theologian argues "we don't know, therefore God". Our knowledge level is irrelevant to the argument.
Exactly. I believe in God because I've seen the miraculous, I've studied both His Word and science, I've seen the change He has brought to my life and the lives of numerous others. All point to only one reasoned conclusion - God. I've looked at the other theories and they are so full of holes that it made me shake my head that people believe them (this was before I believed).
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument


ie,
If-theres-no-God1.jpg

The actual argument is basically:

1. Things can either exist by logical necessity or by contingency.
2. If a thing is contingent, then something must cause it to exist rather than not exist.
3. Consequently, there must be a cause of contingent things, which is not itself contingent.
4. Thus there is a necessary being, who caused the existence of all contingent beings.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is a giant strawman. No theologian argues "we don't know, therefore God". Our knowledge level is irrelevant to the argument.
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues.


faithful_servant said:
Exactly. I believe in God because I've seen the miraculous, I've studied both His Word and science, I've seen the change He has brought to my life and the lives of numerous others. All point to only one reasoned conclusion - God. I've looked at the other theories and they are so full of holes that it made me shake my head that people believe them (this was before I believed).
This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
 
Last edited:

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues.


This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven;t seen "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evdience of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.

If you're going to deliberately pick weak arguments by ignorant people to refute, you can expect to be called out on it.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument


ie,
If-theres-no-God1.jpg

Why don't we just agree that we do not know, do know that it is probably -at least based on today#s level of scientific achievement- always going to be outside of our capabilities to understand God, the Universe and Everything.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If you're going to deliberately pick weak arguments by ignorant people to refute, you can expect to be called out on it.
That was really funny.
YOU Disingenuously (or with an obtuse/religious read) accused me of strawman while you did it Blatantly.

As to who uses it, even theologians, in fact do, and you Still did!
Like the Fish in the Bowl above, you assume the 'cause' is... god/dog.
We don't know the cause/know the cause yet.. or if it's, ie, just part of some larger continuum.

Why don't we just agree that we do not know, do know that it is probably -at least based on today#s level of scientific achievement- always going to be outside of our capabilities to understand God, the Universe and Everything.
There is NO god in evidence TO understand. That is a baseLess assumption and the point of this string.
An assumption that in every case we do have a verdict on, has been shown to be Bogus (Fire, Lightning, etc)
 
Last edited:

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
That was really funny.
YOU Disingenuously (or with an obtuse/religious read) accused me of strawman while you did it Blatantly.

As to who uses it, even theologians, in fact do, and you Still did!
Like the Fish in the Bowl above, you assume the 'cause' is... god/dog.
We don't know the cause/know the cause yet.. or if it's, ie, just part of some larger continuum.


There is NO god in evidence TO understand. That is a baseLess assumption and the point of this string.
An assumption that in every case we do have a verdict on, has been shown to be Bogus (Fire, Lightning, etc)

I think anyone rather odd that thinks humanity capable at this time of deciding the question of the existence of a Creator or Her absence. Actually, there is even a mathematical proof that we cannot understand that much, as we are a subset of a very much larger reality and subsets cannot understand the whole. But, of course, Kurt Gödel might have been wrong.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I think anyone rather odd that thinks humanity capable at this time of deciding the question of the existence of a Creat/or or Her absence. Actually, there is even a mathematical proof that we cannot understand that much, as we are a subset of a very much larger reality and subsets cannot understand the whole. But, of course, Kurt Gödel might have been wrong.
So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.


EDIT: to the below post from Grant that is unexplained, obtuse, and unanswerable. (not worth another separate post)
The Cartoon has EVERYTHING To do with God of the Gaps thinking. Real replies gladly answered.

EDIT II to Grant's second logically Empty second post below. Also not worthy of reply.
 
Last edited:

Grant

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
31,645
Reaction score
7,598
Location
Canada, Costa Rica
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'
The God of the Gaps is an interesting link but has little to do with the cartoon you sent along with it, nor as simplistic as the 'rationales' you included.
 

Grant

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
31,645
Reaction score
7,598
Location
Canada, Costa Rica
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues. This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
Personal experiences can certainly lead to a 'faith' otherwise never experienced. Perhaps your own ideas might change if you also experienced one of these 'anecdotes'.

“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” W.S.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Like the Fish in the Bowl above, you assume the 'cause' is... god/dog.

All my assumptions were axiomatic and clearly outlined. If you can't read then that's your own problem.
 

Grant

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
31,645
Reaction score
7,598
Location
Canada, Costa Rica
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.
EDIT" to the below post from Grant that is unexplained, obtuse, and unanswerable. (not worth another separate post)
The Cartoon has EVERYTHING To do with God of the Gaps thinking. Real replies gladly answered.
Let's not confuse religions with God.

My faith says this cartoon does a disservice to the link but if you believe it sums it up for you then your belief trumps my reality..
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,200
Reaction score
50,574
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The actual argument is basically:

1. Things can either exist by logical necessity or by contingency.
2. If a thing is contingent, then something must cause it to exist rather than not exist.
3. Consequently, there must be a cause of contingent things, which is not itself contingent.
4. Thus there is a necessary being, who caused the existence of all contingent beings.

4 doesn't flow from 3. That's a logical leap to claim a being caused it all
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
All my assumptions were axiomatic and clearly outlined. If you can't read then that's your own problem.
All your posts were Disingenuous, Goofy, Strawman, and only 'axiomatic' if allowed certain premises/conclusions NOT in evidence: IOW, more God of the Gaps.
I love shredding your rigid nonsense.
 
Last edited:

Grant

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
31,645
Reaction score
7,598
Location
Canada, Costa Rica
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
All your posts were Disingenuous, Goofy, Strawman, and only 'axiomatic' if allowed certain premises/conclusions NOT in evidence: IOW, more God of the Gaps/Craps.
I love shredding your rigid nonsense.
You seem to have some very strong beliefs here, all of which are based on your faith.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.


EDIT: to the below post from Grant that is unexplained, obtuse, and unanswerable. (not worth another separate post)
The Cartoon has EVERYTHING To do with God of the Gaps thinking. Real replies gladly answered.

EDIT II to Grant's second logically Empty second post below. Also not worthy of reply.

At least an other mathematician showed that believing was rationally the optimum decision to the No-Belief/Belief matrix, while there is no reason to believe that there is no superior Knowledge that explains the compatibility of a myriad of beliefs that escapes small intelligences like ours.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Some form of entity/organism/living thing.

A being is just a particular thing that exists (as opposed to a concept, so my computer is a being, the internet is a being, but "technology" is not a being).
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues.


This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.

Got it!! YOu're not interested in conversation, just your version of evangelism... Mind closed and locked.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
At least an other mathematician showed that believing was rationally the optimum decision to the No-Belief/Belief matrix, while there is no reason to believe that there is no superior Knowledge that explains the compatibility of a myriad of beliefs that escapes small intelligences like ours.
What?
You have Not presented any relevant passages of Godel that "showed" there is god, or even Evidence OF god.
The great majority of NAS scientists are Atheists. The higher they are on the accomplishment ladder, the more atheist.
Godel is another Anecdote that is proof of nothing. Nor can you post debate that god is more likely than not.

faithful servant said:
mbig said:
This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.

There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
Got it!! YOu're not interested in conversation, just your version of evangelism... Mind closed and locked.
I'm interested in Logical discusssion. You want to chat about, ie, your friend Ernie who was a drug addict and found a new addiction - religion - and is now doing much better.. as "proof" there is a god.
Um.... um...
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom