Prayer

If I pray to god, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it is never granted.

If I pray to my dead cat, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it's never granted.

This proves there is no god, or that my dead cat is god or that prayer is a sham.

Originally posted by 667joe
If I pray to god, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it is never granted.

If I pray to my dead cat, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it's never granted.

This proves there is no god, or that my dead cat is god or that prayer is a sham.

Or that you're some sort of strange cat worshipper ... or that you missed that class in logic ... or that you seriously need to get out more ...

[i]Originally posted by amannio

.. or that you missed that class in logic ... /b]

How did I miss the class in logic? Dead cat or god, the results are the same.

Originally posted by amannion
Or that you're some sort of strange cat worshipper ... or that you missed that class in logic ... or that you seriously need to get out more ...

The point is simple. Prayer is pretty much self-reflection and if you ask for something then it ends up being supported by confirmation bias.

People remember the times their prayers "came true" more than they remember the times they didn't so that affirms that they are being answered.

Praying to a dead cat could have the same effect as praying to a non-existent god.

Originally posted by 667joe
If I pray to god, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it is never granted.

If I pray to my dead cat, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it's never granted.

This proves there is no god, or that my dead cat is god or that prayer is a sham.

If I pray to my dead cat, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it's never granted.

This is clearly an equivocation. Your prayer could be granted or refused, but not by your cat; whereas your prayer could be granted or refused, by God or by someone else. The two situations are not analogous.

Originally posted by 667joe
How did I miss the class in logic? Dead cat or god, the results are the same.

The results would also the same if you prayed to your mother. And as people generally have mothers (or have had), they would not conclude that their mother does not exist.

In fact, prayer aside, if you do anything, the results would be the same. The consequent "the prayer is granted or not granted" is a tautology - it will always be true. So, you will never have an instance in which someone does something X (whether they pray, denounce God, eat cereal) and a prayer is neither granted nor not granted. It is a trivially true conditional.

That is basic logic.

So then there is no god, or at least , if there is a god he(or she) does not act upon prayer. Further, prayer is useful only as self reflection, but self reflection does not require god.

Originally posted by 667joe
So then there is no god, or at least , if there is a god he(or she) does not act upon prayer. Further, prayer is useful only as self reflection, but self reflection does not require god.

You could pray to Prince Charles but he is unlikely to act upon your prayer. That is no proof that he does not exist.

The following would all have the same effect:
God does not exist
God exists but does not respond to prayers
God exists but does not respond to your prayer (maybe you need to be baptised / be confirmed / face Messa / jump in the air 3 times shouting "Walla! Walla!" before he will answer)
God has responded to your prayer but done so subtley, in a manner that is indistinguishable from random chance.

Essentially, you cannot disprove God. This, counter-intuitively, is what makes religion so 'silly' (apologies to the theists here, 'silly' is the wrong word but I can't think of the right one).

--- Penguin.

muslims prayed to allah that they would be given permision by the local council to build a three story moscue in a quiet little street in a small town against the wishes and prayers of all the local residents of that town and allah came through for them.😠

Essentially, you cannot disprove God.

By the same token, you cannot prove god exists. You also can't prove the tooth fairy does or doesn't exist. Rational educated people don't believe in the tooth fairy but yet many believe in a supernatural father in the sky who controls everything.

Originally posted by Penguin
Essentially, you cannot disprove God.

If you said, "based on apparent non-response to a prayer you cannot prove God", or if you said, "you cannot prove all imaginable gods", I would agree. But there are some gods that can most definitely be disproved. In fact he has essentially disproved the existence of a god that answers all prayers instantly in such a way that the person praying always knows it.

I personally think that the existence of most peoples gods can be disproved simply on the basis that an incoherent entity cannot exist. Or put another way: it is incoherent to say that an incoherent entity exists.

Originally posted by 667joe
You also can't prove the tooth fairy does or doesn't exist.

I can.

Originally posted by 667joe
If I pray to god, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it is never granted.

If I pray to my dead cat, my prayer is granted right away, or it's granted later, or it's never granted.

This proves there is no god, or that my dead cat is god or that prayer is a sham.

Prayers are not limited to only prayers of petition. If you limit your prayer to one narrow form, you are bound to any success or failure of that form.

Originally posted by 667joe
By the same token, you cannot prove god exists. You also can't prove the tooth fairy does or doesn't exist. Rational educated people don't believe in the tooth fairy but yet many believe in a supernatural father in the sky who controls everything.

The tooth fairy is a poor metaphor. My mom was the tooth fairy and I can prove it.

Point well taken!