The Many Gods Objection Answered in 60 seconds #shorts

#shorts

Thank you Dr. Liz Jackson, and Justin Mooney for your help with the script.

Check out this very short article by Dr. Liz Jackson for more info about this objection.

[Venaloid]

*"When all else is equal, choose the religion that is most likely to be true"* - But this completely throws out the math you were so fond of until now. Yes, the mathematical result of a "many gods" situation is unintuitive, but you're the one who decided to plug an unintuitive concept (infinity) into a standard formula in the first place; what did you *expect* to happen? The result is not going to be intuitively sound, because when we talk about "infinite utility", we don't really appreciate what that means: we're both just imagining two identical, really big numbers, which is why it *feels* correct to pick the higher probability option, even though the math shows that our intuition is wrong. This is what happens when you insist on using infinity like a regular number: the results quickly become unintuitive. You can accept this, or you can insist that feels equal reals.

[Devious_Dave]

Yes, we should seek what's most likely to be true. How do we apply that approach to the various gods and their promises of an afterlife? Or must we wait for the next video in this series?

[thecloudtherapist]

I'm sorry but I don't see how this short leads me to choose Christianity over islam and I'm a Christian! So would appreciate some further explanation...in plain English please. 😉

[ChristianLoidl]

What is most likely to be true is that there is no god, based on the evidence or lack there of. If there is a God it's not one of any of the earthly religions and beyond our understanding, and certainly does not demand to be worshipped by us or even requires that we believe in it.

[MyContext]

I find the concept of a non-contingent intelligent agent to be an impossibility due to intelligence being developmental and thus not an option as a starting point.

Thus, there is no actual possibility that wouldn't be a point of imagination.

[MyContext]

There is no basis to consider ANY God (non-contingent intelligent agent) claim to be correct given the total absence of evidence.

The appeal to "most likely true" amounts to being an appeal to imagination, since, there is no actual upon which there can be a rational consideration.