Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
In practice is there's no evidence for a FSM then you can take the default position that it does not exist as long as that position is provisional subject to new evidence. Operating from that position isn't flawed reasoning.
|
I agree with you. Sorry if anything I said indicated otherwise (and no, I'm not going back on anything I've said in this thread). Obviously I'm an atheist because I came to similar conclusions. I see no reason to believe in a god, therefore I do not believe in the existence of a god. However, since there is also no evidence for the non-existence of a god, believing in God or gods or whatever is hardly as stupid as a lot of people try to make it out to be. Yes, it's a more immodest position, believing in God, but that doesn't really tell us it's false. No, I'm not putting the onus on us atheists, I'm simply taking the position that one can be fact-minded and a scientist and a good one at that, and still believe in God.
I don't see the difference between "I believe there is no god" and "I do not believe there is a god." If you don't believe there is a god, you must belive there is no god, unless you mean that you don't believe there is a specific god, but other gods may exist. There would seem to me no logical difference, only difference in rhetorical power. Maybe I'm just being an idiot again.
