You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: An Interview with @sircork - One of the SP Delegators of PAL (Peace, Abundance, and Liberty) (I Cried)
I opened with "it's controversial and makes some people mad" .... i understand your position. I really do. And perhaps you are right. But are you CERTAIN?
I am certain that it really helps other people. This is demonstrable. I am uncertain about whether or not it hurts me. This is not demonstrable. Therefore, logically, if I value others as highly as I value myself, it shakes out in favor of donating.
It's one thing to pray AND support modern medicine. It's another entirely to pray INSTEAD of supporting modern medicine. It undoes any logic there is to Pascal's wager.
I know you said "it's controversial and makes some people mad"; I'm not mad, but I am eager to convince you, so that you can be a greater force for good in the world.
You'll be trying to change a life long belief set, my friend. On a very obstinate son of a gun. But I do appreciate the WHY of your motive and in pretty much any other respect I'd be in solidarity with you on the side of the forces for "good in the world!"
Well, let's talk it through logically. What percentages do you put on the various possibilities. Feel free to be general or specific.
(Admittedly, I see very little evidence for God, and I think Pascal's wager doesn't work because I see definite downsides to belief in god if there isn't a god. But this isn't about me. This is about examining how you see the world and trying to help you detect any logical inconsistencies if there are any, and ... well, I guess it is about me - if there are no logical inconsistencies, then I need to change my point of view to yours. I do believe there is one reality, and if we could understand and know everything, we would all agree on everything and solve all the world's problems by working together.)
BUT I want to honor other people's closely held beliefs while examining their logic.
Beyond this door, is either certain death. Or absolutely nothing. No one knows. Percentage of probability? Unknown and cannot be computed with no comparative analysis or empirical historic data on previous threshold crossings.
You gonna go thru that door? Or not.
Well, if going through the door absolutely saves other human lives and reduces their suffering, then yes. It's not just a matter of my own self-interest, after all.
I'll be less popular for it, but I'm not sure it's a risk I'm prepared to take with my eternal or not afterlife or not.
It's not about popularity. Popularity doesn't matter after death.
If you want to play with Pascal's wager, as it seems you do, what makes you think that this position of yours isn't what will keep you out of heaven? Doesn't God want us to be kind? Isn't it kind to help those who need help? Aren't we expected to be Christlike, and didn't Christ give of his blood to save humanity?
Caveat that I'm trying to use your own sense of logic in this, I am not convinced of the existence of God or Christ, but since you're concerned about the risks associated with a possible afterlife, doesn't NOT being an organ donor carry the same unknown and unknowable risks that BEING an organ donor does?
You have made me think, with this entry @Improv. Because now I face a paradox my long passed, rural southern Illinois born and raised father would often summarize to me during my decision making moments with one of his endless "dad idioms" during my growing up times.
Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
Damnit.
You may have me on this one, but I'm not conceding yet. First I need some coffee and time to chew on it. No not the coffee, the concept, silly boy.