7 ms·

Many major religions are monotheistic by definition. The entire premise is that only 1 true god exists. Saying we "agree on 519 of 520 and disagree on 1" is a

Many major religions are monotheistic by definition. The entire premise is that only 1 true god exists. Saying we "agree on 519 of 520 and disagree on 1" is a non-statement. The first person's belief in that 1 by definition precludes his belief in the other 519.

hugh3 16y ago
I think many people may be missing the point. The point of the argument is to challenge people to question whether the existence of their god is any more plausible than any of the other thousands of deities whose existence has been postulated. It works well against Christians or anyone else whose god has specific and well-defined properties. It doesn't work against deists since their "god" is sufficiently poorly-defined to be more plausible than Thor.
- lotharbot 16y ago
  > "It works well against Christians" No it doesn't. It amazes me how often I hear Christians say "this argument works well against atheists" and then make an utterly stupid argument that none of the atheists I know would take seriously. This strikes me as much the same -- it's an argument that atheists think should work well against Christians, but that most Christians will think is stupid and misses the point.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    Oddly enough I was brought up a churchgoing Christian, but was convinced by arguments of pretty much this same form that Christianity was almost certainly false.
  - pyre 16y ago
    It works well against the argument, "How can you not believe in God?" The belief that 'belief in God' is a given is equally stupid.
- Alex3917 16y ago
  "It doesn't work against deists since their 'god' is sufficiently poorly-defined to be more plausible than Thor." Contemporary thinkers might argue that god is well-defined, but ineffable.
RK 16y ago
Many people have actually dabbled in several religions before ending up in the one they're currently in. Alternatively, they may have studied other religions to some extent to reassure themselves of the "correctness" of their original religion. In that sense they are familiar with other beliefs and probably feel that they have rejected those other systems on their own merits. In that framework, the 519 of 520 argument does make since, exclusive of the monotheistic prohibition against other gods. I think what you are saying is that a Christian (for example) would say, "of course I don't believe in other god X, because I'm not allowed to". The 519 of 520 argument depends on whether the monotheist can also reject those other gods on their own merits.

hugh3 16y ago

I think many people may be missing the point. The point of the argument is to challenge people to question whether the existence of their god is any more plausible than any of the other thousands of deities whose existence has been postulated. It works well against Christians or anyone else whose god has specific and well-defined properties. It doesn't work against deists since their "god" is sufficiently poorly-defined to be more plausible than Thor.

lotharbot 16y ago
> "It works well against Christians" No it doesn't. It amazes me how often I hear Christians say "this argument works well against atheists" and then make an utterly stupid argument that none of the atheists I know would take seriously. This strikes me as much the same -- it's an argument that atheists think should work well against Christians, but that most Christians will think is stupid and misses the point.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Oddly enough I was brought up a churchgoing Christian, but was convinced by arguments of pretty much this same form that Christianity was almost certainly false.
- pyre 16y ago
  It works well against the argument, "How can you not believe in God?" The belief that 'belief in God' is a given is equally stupid.
Alex3917 16y ago
"It doesn't work against deists since their 'god' is sufficiently poorly-defined to be more plausible than Thor." Contemporary thinkers might argue that god is well-defined, but ineffable.

RK 16y ago

Many people have actually dabbled in several religions before ending up in the one they're currently in. Alternatively, they may have studied other religions to some extent to reassure themselves of the "correctness" of their original religion. In that sense they are familiar with other beliefs and probably feel that they have rejected those other systems on their own merits. In that framework, the 519 of 520 argument does make since, exclusive of the monotheistic prohibition against other gods. I think what you are saying is that a Christian (for example) would say, "of course I don't believe in other god X, because I'm not allowed to". The 519 of 520 argument depends on whether the monotheist can also reject those other gods on their own merits.