Gator
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 598
- Reaction score
- 74
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Atheism
OK, for those statistically inclined, a thought experiment on which is the “true” religion and maybe would answer does god exist at all. (This is of course impossible, and lets not split obvious hairs, but it’s the journey not the destination).
I thought of an initial premise of how we could at least provide some direction as to which religion/philosophy is right. This of course is assuming we had the ability to collect the data we would need.
Initial Premise – Believing in the correct religion must confer some benefit.
[Contra-argument - Now this may not be the case because if you believe in an afterlife, God may not confer any benefit here. If this is your position please state sources from holy texts that state you get no greater favor here in this life (i.e. your god doesn’t promise you at least once some sort of prosperity or happiness)].
If we were to decide upon some measurable variable that satisfies all the religion’s parameters, we could test it on a statistical hypothesis based on our assumed ability to collect the data.
If the measurable variable, statistically favors one or more (or ALL!) relgion/philosophy over another then we would have some evidence. If none is statistically significant would that lend credence to the atheistic philosophy?
OK that’s it. As an example, my first thought was lethal cancer rates among religions. We could get the cancer rate data by religion and test it.
The main problem with this would be that most cancers take a long time to kill you and this would fall under being a “test from god”, so that doesn’t work.
My next thought was instantaneous deaths in car accidents. This gets rid of the “test from god” aspect as the accident doesn’t really give you time to learn anything metaphysical or philosophical from the event so it can’t be a test. So you see what I mean hopefully.
So, the test would be, "do statistically more or less Muslims/Christians/Buddhists/etc. die in instantaneous deaths" (accounting for all other variables of course).
Any other suggestions that we could measure that would work? Any improvement on the premise?
I thought of an initial premise of how we could at least provide some direction as to which religion/philosophy is right. This of course is assuming we had the ability to collect the data we would need.
Initial Premise – Believing in the correct religion must confer some benefit.
[Contra-argument - Now this may not be the case because if you believe in an afterlife, God may not confer any benefit here. If this is your position please state sources from holy texts that state you get no greater favor here in this life (i.e. your god doesn’t promise you at least once some sort of prosperity or happiness)].
If we were to decide upon some measurable variable that satisfies all the religion’s parameters, we could test it on a statistical hypothesis based on our assumed ability to collect the data.
If the measurable variable, statistically favors one or more (or ALL!) relgion/philosophy over another then we would have some evidence. If none is statistically significant would that lend credence to the atheistic philosophy?
OK that’s it. As an example, my first thought was lethal cancer rates among religions. We could get the cancer rate data by religion and test it.
The main problem with this would be that most cancers take a long time to kill you and this would fall under being a “test from god”, so that doesn’t work.
My next thought was instantaneous deaths in car accidents. This gets rid of the “test from god” aspect as the accident doesn’t really give you time to learn anything metaphysical or philosophical from the event so it can’t be a test. So you see what I mean hopefully.
So, the test would be, "do statistically more or less Muslims/Christians/Buddhists/etc. die in instantaneous deaths" (accounting for all other variables of course).
Any other suggestions that we could measure that would work? Any improvement on the premise?
