Ancillary Debate - 3 additional questions to Anfauglir from Fran

[Inactive_1]

This additional thread was opened as requested by Anfauglir, to be started with these 3 questions to him from Fran -

1... Even though it is plausible to you... why exactly don't you believe any of what you said above about aliens being responsible for the events surrounding Jesus' death, burial and reports of his resurrection?

**NOTE:  We can substitute ANY historical event from the past and postulate your scenario as a possible explanation for that event.  But let's just stick with the subject at hand for this question if you wouldn't mind.

2... Even though it is plausible... why don't you believe that you and the human race and our universe was created 10 minutes ago with built in age and built in memories and that we are nothing more than a sophisticated hologram or computer simulation which was produced by these same aliens you invoked earlier?  (I'm assuming here that you don't believe you were just created 10 minutes ago).  In fact, do you have any doubts that such a possibility couldn't be based technology and techniques we know exists now, or could exist in the future?  Just like your alien example above?

3... Even though it is plausible... why don't you believe that your atheistic position is simply the result of manipulation or brain-washing by these same kind of aliens which you've invoked in here?  Certainly brainwashing techniques and implementation would be far superior in the future for us...  and which would be likely in an advanced race.

[Anfauglir]

1... Even though it is plausible to you... why exactly don't you believe any of what you said above about aliens being responsible for the events surrounding Jesus' death, burial and reports of his resurrection?

**NOTE:  We can substitute ANY historical event from the past and postulate your scenario as a possible explanation for that event.  But let's just stick with the subject at hand for this question if you wouldn't mind.

I think I have answered this question in full in the "main" thread.  In brief though, I do not "believe" it because - like the resurrection hypothesis - it requires the addition of incredible factors for which there is no direct evidence.  It does, however, require fewer additions than "resurrection", which makes it "more likely" in my opinion - but still not one I will claim as "definitely true".

[Anfauglir]

2... Even though it is plausible... why don't you believe that you and the human race and our universe was created 10 minutes ago with built in age and built in memories and that we are nothing more than a sophisticated hologram or computer simulation which was produced by these same aliens you invoked earlier?  (I'm assuming here that you don't believe you were just created 10 minutes ago).  In fact, do you have any doubts that such a possibility couldn't be based technology and techniques we know exists now, or could exist in the future?  Just like your alien example above?

Heh...likewise, how do YOU know that god didn't create the universe 10 minutes ago, with the memories of reading all the books about the resurrection (that were likewise created 10 minutes ago)?  Because that would mean exactly the same thing - that there never WAS a mystical resurrection.

To be brutally honest, while I find this type of question mildly entertaining in a "what if....?" kind of way, I find them ultimately irrelevant - part of the reason why I did not want to derail the main thread.  I find them irrelevant because there is never any way posited or suggested that would allow for anyone to be able to test to discover whether the universe is "real", or a "10-minuter" (hereafter the R- and 10M- universes).

Compare the R- and 10M- universes.  The construction of the 10M- universe (or a jar-brain universe, of computer simulation universe) would (from the nature of the question) have been done in such a way that is was indistinguishable from the R-universe.  Thus, I will experience things exactly as I would in the R- universe....my memories of the past history would be identical to that in the R-universe....in short, there would be no practical difference, and no way of telling the difference.

(Aside....in his Blog, Scott Adams (creator of Dilbert) posits that we are indeed computer simulations of our old selves that were downloaded into a computer universe on our deaths, and suggests some ways we might tell that this is a simulation and not reality.  Worth a look, if that interests you!)

But back to Fran's question....why don't I believe I am in a 10M-universe rather than an R-universe?  Again, I cannot definitively discount he 10M-universe - how can I, if there is no way of testing?  But what I can do, again, is determine which is the "most reasonable" of the two.  Is it "most reasonable" to assume that the universe is exactly as it seems to be, exactly as my memory and ervy aspect of reality makes it appear to be?  Or is it "more reasonable" to presume it is all a computer simulation, which there is no evidence for....and which would itself require there to be an R-universe in any case for the 10M-simulation to be contained within?

Neither I, nor Fran, can say for sure that we are not in a 10M-universe.  But it is more reasonable to assume that we are NOT, pending a test that proves it one way or the other.

[Anfauglir]

3... Even though it is plausible... why don't you believe that your atheistic position is simply the result of manipulation or brain-washing by these same kind of aliens which you've invoked in here?  Certainly brainwashing techniques and implementation would be far superior in the future for us...  and which would be likely in an advanced race.

Yes indeed.....I could be brainwashed by aliens....but why pick them?  Aliens, remember, requires one "extra-normal" piece of information.  A more reasonable suggestion would be "the CIA manipulated my mind to make me an atheist", since that would involve NO additional elements.  We know the techniques exist, we know the CIA exists....therefore the CIA made me an atheist, right?

Wrong.  Because there is zero additional evidence for it, so while technically possible, it is not "most reasonable".  "Most reasonable", in this case, is that my route to atheism follows the route which I remember, and which can be attested to by numbers of people, and by numbers of posts and diary entries.

Its a similar argument to the one for question (2) - that the most reasonable assumption to make is the one that the world is as it appears to be, until new evidence arrives.

- - - - -

Fran,

I've now answered the 3 additional questions you were so desperate I answer.  You have also not answered MY question from the main thread - "why is resurrection MORE reasonable that my alien explanation"? 

[Fran]

i'm still writing. I was hoping to finish over the weekend.  sorry for the delay.

[Inactive_1]

Fran, is this debate being abandoned by you or not? It's been over 1 1/2 weeks since you said you were working on a response. I realize some responses take some time, but I don't see why these debates cannot move along at a faster pace.

Please respond with your answer here.

Thanks.

Also, I need you to join in this discussion please -

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=10949.msg281200#msg281200

[Inactive_1]

I am waiting on a response from Anfauglir as to whether he wants this topic to be moved for continuation in General Religious Discussion, or locked and archived. In any case, it will not remain as a formal debate topic here.

[Inactive_1]

Anfauglir requests this be archived, as Fran has ignored it and depends on others to form his opinions.