Spinoza’s God: Einstein believed in it, but what was it?

Re:Spinoza’s God: Einstein believed in it, but what was it? by anthk on Friday October 15, 2021 @07:23AM (#28876601)

>So either you are saying there is no evidence for one particular definition of God, but you are not giving us the definition or you are saying there is no evidence for any of the different definitions of God that might exist

Russel's teapot.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Spinoza’s God: Einstein believed in it, but what was it? by kmmlng on Monday October 18, 2021 @04:15AM (#28903268)

I don't think this is an example of Russel's teapot. In Russel's teapot, you are giving a solid explanation of what you are claiming, it just happens to be unfalsifiable.

In the example I was criticizing, the word "God" was used without any further explanation of its meaning (in a thread which hosts discussions on different definitions of the word "God" no less).

Of course, if you are a priori assuming that any definition of God is going to be unfalsifiable, you can draw the connection to Russel's teapot, but again, I don't think you can convincingly do this without knowing all the definitions.

[ Parent | on HN ]