44
   

Are atheists being more illogical than agnostics?

 
 
solipsister
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jan, 2021 03:47 pm
@Jasper10,
Quote:
I hope that God exists.....All anyone has is a hope that God exists or doesn’t exist.


0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jan, 2021 04:59 pm
@Jasper10,
Or Santa, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The people who hope a god exists have had millenia to find evidence. So far, nada.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jan, 2021 11:49 pm
I'm happy. The Warriors beat the Lakers today.
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 02:31 am
@hingehead,
Well the people who hope a god doesn't exist have had millenia to find DEFINITIVE proof. So far, nada.It would appear you need reminding....forget definitive carnal proof...it's a "red herring".

hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 06:38 am
@Jasper10,
The requirement to prove a negative has way less weight than the requirement to prove an assertion. If you can’t acknowledge/see that you are an intellectual sloth. Look forward to your proof the tooth fairy doesn’t exist.
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 06:51 am
@hingehead,
With all due respect...who holds the negative view here if neither side can provide DEFINITIVE proof of whether God exists or not?
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 07:08 am
@Jasper10,
I am just trying to put a balanced logic forward here.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 07:10 pm
@Jasper10,
It's a conceit to suggest that the assertion of something's existence has to be disproved by people who do not make the assertion.

Prove to me that Santa doesn't exist.
Prove to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist.

You make the assertion, you have the (much greater) responsibility to prove it.

This not a 50/50 proposition.

Your logic is not logical.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2021 07:12 pm
@Jasper10,
Sorry to be boringly repetitive - but this is not balanced.
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2021 02:30 am
@hingehead,
Well if neither side can provide that proof why bother asking?
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2021 06:33 am
@Jasper10,
You keep ignoring my point (to preserve your cognitive dissonance, no doubt).

Santa Claus is real.

Who has the greater burden of proof - me or a disbeliever?
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2021 06:43 am
@hingehead,
I am not missing your point...I totally understand your point....There is no burden of proof on either side to provide proof....hence the BALANCE....
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2021 07:02 am
@Jasper10,
There is no burden on either party each side of the fence in any of the below 4 off scenarios to provide definitive carnal proof.

1.Unbeliever (0) ….fence....Unbeliever (0)
2.Unbeliever (0) ….fence....Believer (1)
3.Believer (1) ….fence....Unbeliever (0)
4.Believer (1) ….fence....Believer (1)
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2021 04:31 pm
@Jasper10,
Really - so any assertion at all should have the same gravitas as any other?

Approach everything as if you have no experience of reality - have learnt nothing - have no analytical skills - deny your inbuilt inference engine.

Ridiculous.
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jan, 2021 04:10 am
@hingehead,
No...just don't ASSUME or adopt a bias...when you DON'T have definitive proof one way or the other.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jan, 2021 05:17 pm
@Jasper10,
So, Santa is as valid as God and there's a 50% chance either is true?

Likewise the planet Jupiter is actually a space goat's testicle, or at least there are equal proofs on both sides of the argument.

Sigh.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jan, 2021 05:20 pm
@Jasper10,
I can say anything exists, without proof, and you will accept there's a fair chance it's true because you can't disprove it?

Or is there a special clause in logic for the discussion of the existence/non-existence of deities?
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jan, 2021 02:31 am
@hingehead,
None of us have definitive proof that God either exists or doesn't exist. We all have the possibility to reach a nihilistic reasoning stand off whether this be internally with ourselves or externally with others. Some people are illogical and only consider half the formula, others however are persuaded by the complete formula.
Examples:
1.People who only consider half the formula are persuaded by Buddhism RELIGIOUS belief principles because it gives them comfort. They are convinced that SELF is an illusion. They are only persuaded that Good (1) is Bad (0) and Bad (0) is Good (1).
2.People who consider the whole formula have the complete picture and accept SELF which is NOT an illusion and they acknowledge their failings because they accept that Good (1) is Good (1) and Bad (0) is Bad (0).

Good and Bad are separate.
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jan, 2021 04:01 am
@Jasper10,
It is my view that one needs to start considering the possibility that GOD has designed a perfectly balanced biological reasoning machine that our SPIRIT occupies.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jan, 2021 04:07 pm
@Jasper10,
I have no doubt that’s your view, and I respect it. But we were discussing the equivalence of proving a negative and proving a positive from a logical standpoint.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 02/24/2021 at 08:30:19