After a long hard ride in not-particularly-nice weather today I didn’t feel like faffing around making dinner, so I went to the fish and chip shop. I haven’t had fish and chips for ages, so I thought this would be an opportune moment. I went to a shop I only discovered a while back, and have been to ever since because their chips aren’t greasy and their fish is good.
Or at least, good until now. I ordered the usual cod and chips; there were two piles of fish in the counter and the girl picked a fish from the larger of the piles, which I presumed would be the cod pile, being the most popular choice. However, now I’m not convinced. If I were asked to bet, I would put money on that fish actually being haddock. It just didn’t taste quite as cod-like as it should have done.
My mind is all a-flutter. If this fish wasn’t cod, how many of the others in the cod pile also were of a different fishy persuasion? Was it just a one-off, a careless mistake to put a haddock in with the cod? Had the piles inadvertently been swapped in their entirety? Without evidence there is just no way for me to know, and now the shop is closed such evidence is beyond reach.
Since there is no ultimate truth. You’ll have to decide what works best for you. The discomfort that comes through your post suggests that it works best for you for the fish to be haddock.
By the way, did you have a nice ride? I’m going on my first ‘proper’ MUni tomorrow (ie with someone else and elsewhere other than my usual baby MUni route that I have not mastered yet). OOo, I’m excited.
First you have to describe this cod. If you expect me to believe in cod, then you have to describe what it is you wish me to believe. Define cod. THEN, if your definition is internally consistent AND it does not conflict with the world-at-large, then I am open to the possibility of cod existing. At this point, you must present evidence or arguments that support the existence of cod.
The agnosticodists say that the nature of cod is unknowable. Some go even further and state that the existence of cod is unknowable. But still, you must decide. There is no middle ground.
Either you believe you are eating cod or you don’t. Is “I am eating cod” a true statement to you? Is “cod exists” a true statement to you? You seem to have doubt and uncertainty that is beyond your comfort level. You therefore cannot say, “yes, I am eating cod”. So (follow along carefully now…), you don’t hold the belief that you are eating cod. That doesn’t mean that you believe you are NOT eating cod. Lacking a belief does not equate to belief in the opposite. The theisticods say “cod exists”. If you cannot say “cod exists – they served me cod” – then you cannot count yourself as a theisticod. Which makes you an atheisticod, because you lack that belief. As an atheisticod, you rely on reason and logic. Therefore, if presented with sufficient evidence that cod exists, you would certainly believe. On the other hand, it may be nearly impossible to convince you that you are not eating haddock. But whatever you do, do not succumb to the insidious Pascal’s Wager – do not decide to believe in cod because you think the odds are in your favor. Also, do not choose to believe you are eating cod because you think it will make you happier. This is insanity.
BillyTheMountain!!! Where are you? Join our discussion. I want your input. It’s time for you to talk about LOVE…
Incidentally, as with all these discussions, there seems to be an automatic prejudice in favour of a western approach. What about the oriental kebab? Somepeople beleive that when an animal dies, and is cooked and eaten, it comes back. I believe this is called regurgitation.
