ProgrammingGodJordan

I await sonjnana's response to my recent query, (Not yours, nor Dust's)

Once more, are you theistic? Your answer to my query above shall help to determine how many steps my subsequent answer to you shall contain.

Does it grant you amusement to repeat my style of expression? Have you no novel thought cycles?

Are you theistic?

My prior response obtains.

I await sonjnana's response on the matter.

Here is an answer: Whether or not anybody believes it, gravitational theory obtains.

How supposedly so?

Weak responses of your type above, have already been approached on prior pages. Anyway, a review is below. Fallibism, like some other theses, does hea...

Whether or not you agree, and regardless of your feelings, belief is both defined to be able to occur on evidence, or on non-evidence.

Richard Dawkins (a paraphrasing): "Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if humanity went extinct, instead replaced by artificial entities". https://www.youtube...

i) I reasonably live to aim to contribute to the development of Artificial General Intelligence. ii) Why is the purpose of human life to create Artifi...

Life after death is scientifically unfounded.

Declare initially, and then declare again, only when new evidence arises?

I don't detect the significance of your comment above, wrt the OP.

Can the query be rephrased as follows: "If a chair is in front of you, would you make the statement there is a chair in front of you, or make the stat...

Do you detect that you shall demonstrate your point to be valid, regardless of whatever answer I return?

?

Things don't require belief, to be valid. (as long mentioned).

Queries/statements of that nature have already been approached on page 1.

Do you mean the same way I showed your recent idea (which was bundled with that query) to be false?

That query is in the same realm of your recent idea, which has been shown to be invalid.

Scientism permits belief, i.e. it does not underline that beliefs are generally science opposing in nature.

Especially now that your recent idea has been shown to be invalid, I don't detect the relevance of your question.

Please see point 4 above.

A) It is silly to advise me that belief does not necessitate non evidence, because the OP had long underlined that one may believe in both science and...

Albeit, I am yet to detect novel information from the responders on this thread so far.

One needs not belief to observe probabilities.

Your response is demonstrably incomplete: Belief is a model that generally permits the ignorance of evidence.

Contrary to your false response, I had already mentioned my goals (See my response on page 10): 1. Unravel errors of my own, where applicable. (i.e. l...

Why ignore the remainder of my quote, to support your false preconceived notions? My full quote: "Non-beliefism underlines, that "one may rank his/her...

I don't detect the relevance of your comment above. Your response doesn't remove the reality that belief generally permits ignorance of evidence; and ...

That some beliefs may occur in science, does not suddenly remove the reality that belief mostly permits ignorance of evidence. Non-beliefism underline...

That you constrain your mind to belief, does not necessitate that everybody else constrains their minds to belief.

And beliefs are avoidable altogether.

On the contrary: https://i.imgur.com/Bc2G9d4.png

"Non-beliefism" does not underline that belief necessarily constitutes non evidence. The OP had long underlined that belief may occur in both science ...

On the contrary: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/belief https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25741291/

See the response above.

As I mentioned before, belief is a model that mostly permits the ignorance evidence. It's quite trivial to see that science does not work this way, sc...

Irrelevant query.

On the contrary, belief is defined such that people tend to generally ignore evidence, which contrasts nonbeliefism.

I don't detect the relevance of that query, especially given my earlier response.

I don't detect the relevance of that query.

How so?

Once more I don't detect the relevance of your comment; The OP, as well as the entire reason why I created non-beliefism, was particularly because bel...

I don't detect the relevance of your response above, because it is long stated on the very same research page, that belief is generally adopted by peo...

Why did you not bother to read the sources provided in my earlier response? Anyway, see this same source from 1.b (from my earlier response), showing ...

See the source in (1.a).

Data shows that most of the time, belief permits ignorance of evidence. Why would I select a model that most of the time, does not permit that evidenc...