Proof that god exists?
Ok while I was taking a bath today I came up with this crazy thought.
There are so many people that believe in god.
So many people survived through tough times in their lives holding on to their belief in god. Not saying that there were others who were not able to hold on to it enough and see it through. But still the first set of people do exist.
If its their belief ( at least at some level as you can argue that belief is just a manifestation of their will power or lack thereof ) that helped them though the times, isn’t it proof enough that god exists?
I mean to some god is a passive benevolent observer who will make things right finally….and the belief in him giving the strength to survive thru tough times. Isnt this satisfied?
This is leaving all the other concepts of heaven and hell aside. Just this restricted definition of god….isn’t it satisfied?
I know there might be some logcal fallacies to this arguement But I cant think of any rt now…..
If some body want to beleive in God , they will find some way out to tell that at least this exists … just like the wolfs story of blaming the lamb for making the rivers water dirty
Comment by shrihari — May 11, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
Well, I’ve always seen it like this. Most people at sometime or another, need help from someone else. In our heart of hearts, during a time of pressure, it always helps to think that there is someone else who is helping you achieve your goal. This can be a “physical” entity such as a friend or a partner, or a “thought”, like God.
What I’m trying to say is, you really don’t need to prove whether God exists or not. If you think it helps believing in someone “unknown”, go right ahead. If you don’t, well, nothing wrong there as well!
Comment by Nikhil — May 11, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
@ Hari
I am aking you to tell me what wrong with THIS argument…..and this definition of god
@Nikhil
I perfectly understand what your saying….I am just saying that since this helps , isnt it proof enough that god exists?
Comment by cafm — May 11, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
EDIT: SEE END OF ANSWER
Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity
Also Known as: Ad Populum
Description of Appeal to Popularity
The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:
1. Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
2. Therefore X is true.
The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.
It is clearly fallacious to accept the approval of the majority as evidence for a claim. For example, suppose that a skilled speaker managed to get most people to absolutely love the claim that 1+1=3. It would still not be rational to accept this claim simply because most people approved of it. After all, mere approval is no substitute for a mathematical proof. At one time people approved of claims such as “the world is flat”, “humans cannot survive at speeds greater than 25 miles per hour”, “the sun revolves around the earth” but all these claims turned out to be false.
This sort of “reasoning” is quite common and can be quite an effective persusasive device. Since most humans tend to conform with the views of the majority, convincing a person that the majority approves of a claim is often an effective way to get him to accept it. Advertisers often use this tactic when they attempt to sell products by claiming that everyone uses and loves their products. In such cases they hope that people will accept the (purported) approval of others as a good reason to buy the product.
This fallacy is vaguely similar to such fallacies as Appeal to Belief and Appeal to Common Practice. However, in the case of an Ad Populum the appeal is to the fact that most people approve of a claim. In the case of an Appeal to Belief, the appeal is to the fact that most people believe a claim. In the case of an Appeal to Common Practice, the appeal is to the fact that many people take the action in question.
This fallacy is closely related to the Appeal to Emotion fallacy, as discussed in the entry for that fallacy.
Examples of Appeal to Popularity
1. “My fellow Americans…there has been some talk that the government is overstepping its bounds by allowing police to enter peoples’ homes without the warrants traditionally required by the Constitution. However, these are dangerous times and dangerous times require appropriate actions. I have in my office thousands of letters from people who let me know, in no uncertain terms, that they heartily endorse the war against crime in these United States. Because of this overwhelming approval, it is evident that the police are doing the right thing.”
2. “I read the other day that most people really like the new gun control laws. I was sort of suspicious of them, but I guess if most people like them, then they must be okay.”
3. Jill and Jane have some concerns that the rules their sorority has set are racist in character. Since Jill is a decent person, she brings her concerns up in the next meeting. The president of the sorority assures her that there is nothing wrong with the rules, since the majority of the sisters like them. Jane accepts this ruling but Jill decides to leave the sorority.
—
(And if this “proof” was valid, it would prove the existence of many different and contradicting gods)
> here the popularity is ending up heling serve the purpose the God in a way…so isnt this fallacy ruled out?
No… you haven’t established the existence of a god, so you can’t make that claim. That’s circular reasoning.
Believing talking squirrels exist helps talking squirrels, because when they talk people listen to them instead of thinking they lost their minds. Of course, since talking squirrels don’t really exist, the argument is false.
Comment by Jack — May 11, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Weird at best!
Comment by Zubin — May 16, 2007 @ 4:50 pm