The unreasonable propositions in our lives

[Rivendale]

I think "I don't know" is probably the most reasonable response or position to take.

I don't see it reasonable to believe something is true if there is not good reason to think it true.

I don't claim that my own stance is reasonable; I simply don't think it makes sense for me to assume the existence of entities without good reason. Otherwise, it all just looks like making things up.

Not only that it appears that certain people can unlock a channel of communication while simultaneously ignoring other possible reasons for the experience. Motivated reasoning? I would really like to know what the epistemology is when jettisoning alternative explanations for communication with Devine beings.

[huckelberry]

I was under the impression that faith and reason were cooperating partners.

Rivendale , I think there is a variety of different things in the basket of stuff called faith. It is quite possible you and I I thinking of different varieties and you may be quite right about some.

I prefer levels of confidence rather than faith. Is it reasonable to believe something when the threshold of confidence is low? I would say no. The problem is in the weighting of the evidence. Since everyone processes the world differently it is hard to have a concensus on what is considered valid evidence. However, there is an aggregate of information that can be said to form justified true belief. Is there evidence that there is a supernatural world? Does that evidence comport with our shared reality? Does the world and universe behave as if supernatural beings are interacting in any demonstrable way? Does pareidolia play a part in discrepancies between our shared reality?

Rivendale , you introduce the category justified true belief. I suppose that is something like the earth is not flat, the sun is hot and rocks are denser than water. I suppose there are quite a few things which can fall into an agreed area beyond reasonable question. Ideas about the supernatural do not have that sort of certainty. I think they all have an element of uncertainty. They are more hypothetical than they are confirmed facts.

If there is a supernatural dimension it seems more active in the realm our interior life not in making potholes in the road.

[Rivendale]

I prefer levels of confidence rather than faith. Is it reasonable to believe something when the threshold of confidence is low? I would say no. The problem is in the weighting of the evidence. Since everyone processes the world differently it is hard to have a concensus on what is considered valid evidence. However, there is an aggregate of information that can be said to form justified true belief. Is there evidence that there is a supernatural world? Does that evidence comport with our shared reality? Does the world and universe behave as if supernatural beings are interacting in any demonstrable way? Does pareidolia play a part in discrepancies between our shared reality?

Rivendale , you introduce the category justified true belief. I suppose that is something like the earth is not flat, the sun is hot and rocks are denser than water. I suppose there are quite a few things which can fall into an agreed area beyond reasonable question. Ideas about the supernatural do not have that sort of certainty. I think they all have an element of uncertainty. They are more hypothetical than they are confirmed facts.

If there is a supernatural dimension it seems more active in the realm our interior life not in making potholes in the road.

I don't know why or how the inner perceptions of a person are regulated to an external agent. If there is a supernatural realm this seems to be the most bizarre method. I find the theory of electromagnetic inductive feedback to be much more persuasive in explaining conscious awareness and personal Qualia. And yes, justified true belief is exactly like you mentioned. Are ghosts, resurrected beings, the afterlife, judgment day all encompassed in JTB?

[huckelberry]

Rivendale , you introduce the category justified true belief. I suppose that is something like the earth is not flat, the sun is hot and rocks are denser than water. I suppose there are quite a few things which can fall into an agreed area beyond reasonable question. Ideas about the supernatural do not have that sort of certainty. I think they all have an element of uncertainty. They are more hypothetical than they are confirmed facts.

If there is a supernatural dimension it seems more active in the realm our interior life not in making potholes in the road.

I don't know why or how the inner perceptions of a person are regulated to an external agent. If there is a supernatural realm this seems to be the most bizarre method. I find the theory of electromagnetic inductive feedback to be much more persuasive in explaining conscious awareness and personal Qualia. And yes, justified true belief is exactly like you mentioned. Are ghosts, resurrected beings, the afterlife, judgment day all encompassed in JTB?

Rivendale, I was trying to be clear that I see ideas about the supernatural as clearly not included in justified true belief.

I do not know what sort of idea you are referring to with the phrase inner perception of a person regulated to an external agent.

[wenglund]

Is it reasonable to have faith in Jesus Christ? What are the reasons? And do those reasons fall in the realm of rational?

Those talks by Bednar that were critiqued by RFM and BYP make me wonder if Bednar has an explanation that deems faith in Jesus Christ as reasonable. I'm skeptical that he'd have good reasons. But does anyone? It seems to me anytime we invoke faith as the reason we are simply tracing a circle in our reasoning. Can we really escape that circle for things that are claimed by faith?

When discussing faith, I find it helps to realize that:
1. It has both secular and religious connotations
2. It is synonymous with trust, belief, confidence, conviction, hope, etc.
3. It is arrayed along a spectrum, from weak to strong, blind to informed, false to true, unreasonable to reasonable, irrational to rational, etc.
4. The weakness or strength, etc. of faith is contingent upon the level, types, and strength of supportive/contra evidence and reasoning

Regarding faith in Jesus Christ, and whether such faith is unreasonable or unreasonable, weak or strong, etc. it depends upon what one may consider acceptable evidence and reasoning. This is where the critic and believer tend to part ways. Elder Bednar briefly pointed out several of those difference--such as, evidence obtained through seeing and the other 5 senses as contrasted with evidence obtain through the Spirit and other things.

It also depends upon where a given individual or group is at in their faith development. A recent investigator, with little knowledge and experience in the gospel, may be weak in faith as compared with the strength of someone who has been a long-time member, and is quite knowledgeable about the gospel, and has been thoroughly tested and tried in their faith.

There is also the difference between those who have failed the tests of faith and lost faith as contrasted those that have passed and excelled in their faith and are at the top of the class so to speak (I have in mind the critics as opposed to Elder Bednar).

Elder Bednar implied the spectrum of faith and the process of faith development when he mentioned passages from Alma 32.

And, while he forcefully proclaimed that faith in Jesus is reasonable, and that the critics were unreasonable to suggest otherwise, nevertheless, he left each to confirm or disconfirm that for themselves using the Alma 32 in relation to 10 doctrinal truths.

Thanks, Wade Englund

[consiglieri]

God how I’ve missed that “Thanks”!

[Rivendale]

I don't know why or how the inner perceptions of a person are regulated to an external agent. If there is a supernatural realm this seems to be the most bizarre method. I find the theory of electromagnetic inductive feedback to be much more persuasive in explaining conscious awareness and personal Qualia. And yes, justified true belief is exactly like you mentioned. Are ghosts, resurrected beings, the afterlife, judgment day all encompassed in JTB?

Rivendale, I was trying to be clear that I see ideas about the supernatural as clearly not included in justified true belief.

I do not know what sort of idea you are referring to with the phrase inner perception of a person regulated to an external agent.

I fail to recognize how a believer justifies internal communication with an external source. The science at this point is fairly clear that any intervention into the cognitive processes would be seen and documented. The time to believe things is when there is enough evidence to support it. If I felt I was being communicated with by an external agent my first step would be to get an MRI.

[huckelberry]

I fail to recognize how a believer justifies internal communication with an external source. The science at this point is fairly clear that any intervention into the cognitive processes would be seen and documented. The time to believe things is when there is enough evidence to support it. If I felt I was being communicated with by an external agent my first step would be to get an MRI.

You sound as though some scientist is tracking and documenting my complete cognitive process. Maybe in star trek five or six.

I suppose an mri might find that tumor.

[Rivendale]

I fail to recognize how a believer justifies internal communication with an external source. The science at this point is fairly clear that any intervention into the cognitive processes would be seen and documented. The time to believe things is when there is enough evidence to support it. If I felt I was being communicated with by an external agent my first step would be to get an MRI.

You sound as though some scientist is tracking and documenting my complete cognitive process. Maybe in star trek five or six.

I suppose an mri might find that tumor.

They actually are. https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/Brian Laundrie ... -thinking/

[drumdude]

I think because of the sheer number of people who have believed in religion, that alone makes it reasonable to believe in religion.

But the bar for reasonability is low. It's reasonable to believe your marriage will last, even though 50% of them don't.