If you're an empiricist, you dont believe in god. If you

>>9619610
>If you're an empiricist, you dont believe in god.

I don't necessarily agree. When I look at the world, I try to do it stone-cold objectively. However, when it comes to the origins of our universe, that is not something you can really observe, so that's where belief comes in. For instance, I think the idea we live in a simulated reality is very plausible. Believing that doesn't go against empiricism because either way I can't see how our universe was created.

"There ain't no evidentialists in thrownness"
- Will "to Believe" Jamesdegger

>>9619610

The philosophical level of this threads is simply astonishing. you guys draw implications from things without any actual thinking behind it.

>If you are an empiricist, you don't believe in god.

No. If you are en empiricist, you believe in experience. To say that you don't believe in god, therefore, you would need (a) a working definition of what experience is (b) a prove of how it is impossible to ever experience of god according to that definition.

Now please articulate these two points and we may start debating whether an empiricist can/cannot believe in god.

>>9619610
Syllogism at its finest. Nice try kid.

File: descartes.jpg (295KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1920x1080px

>>9619610
If you are an empiricist, you are not a rationalist.

OP BTFO