Why is it that the slightest success inspires hope/belief, but constant failures are left out of the equation?
by Father Tucker:
0.000000000001% is taken as an alarming success rate, irrefutable proof! And the best part is, you can use this amazing success rate to prove anything from crystal ball gazing to prayer. You can even prove energy-based healing, love spells, telepathy and wishing upon a star. Lick a frog and foretell your own death day! Why, anything is possible in this wonderful world where a 0.000000000001% success rate is considered prime evidence.
I have to chalk it up to hope, AKA the denial of reality. . . but what else am I missing?
Answer by laslo.kovacs
confirmation bias, I think is the term used to describe this error in critical thinking.
e.g.: You pray for something. Two things happen
1. You get it or something like it, and you praise God
2. You don't get it and your minister tells you that God thinks you aren't ready for it yet.
3. You get something else and then you claim that it is related to what you wanted, even if it seems only remotely so.
What does not happen:
You don't say that God failed to answer your prayer.
God wins either way.
dont think your feeling any diffrent than alote of other people. Quit being so hard,and quit thinking so hard.t
Without 'failure' there would be NO successes! Just ask, Edison and Lincoln???
um, who leaves failures out of the equation?
when i fail at something constantly, it gives me important data. failure is indicative of many possibilities. wrong method, for example.
G-d is real. When it is shown to you, you cannot deny it. Hopefully it will be shown to you.
Im not sure about the accuracy of your statement...but isnt that what hope is? Believing for the best against the odds?