Anders Sandberg:
> Actually, this is simple: from a strictly scientific viewpoint God is an
> unsupported hypothesis which does not appear to be falsifiable or
> possible to test in any way. There are of course some scientists
> who think the God hypothesis is true.
Actually, it's not *that* simple. In my experience god(s) is not
a single hypothesis, it's more like a spectrum of hypotheses ranging
from an omnipotent and everpresent something (easily verifiable, I
just tried talking with It and It didn't respond---false!) all the
way to a benevolent creator who doesn't talk with its subjects
because they have become wicked (these are mostly unfalsifiable and,
well, useless). All these hypotheses, if believed in properly, tend
to be excellent placebo cures for a wide range of ailments.
Speaking of placebo: I bought a pair of wrist bands that are supposed
to cure motion sickness by applying pressure to certain points on the
arms, and amazingly enough they work for me! Who needs God when we
have the Allmighty Placebo. Too bad It can't cure cancer. (Hmm,
perhaps it can but it's an undocumented function... ;)
Regards,
--dv