First, a few short definitions are in order:
Theist: one who believes in the existence of a God or gods.
Hard atheist: one who believes that God does not exist.
Soft atheist: one who lacks a belief in a God or gods.
The God hypothesis:
Claim A: God exists.
Claim B: God does not exist.
From the definitions above, theists adhere to claim A, hard atheists adhere to claim B, and soft atheists adhere to neither.
In a rational discussion of the God Hypothesis:
Theists must shoulder the burden of proof fro claim A. if they fail, God is not shown to exist, but God is not necessarily shown not to exist either. Hard atheists must shoulder the burden for claim B. If they fail, God is not shown to not exist, but neither is he shown to exist. Soft atheists have no burden of proof as they have made no claim of belief. They simply lack a belief in God's existence.
So, does anyone disagree with the burdens of proof as I have laid them out here?
2007-10-08
03:55:23
·
14 answers
·
asked by
SomeGuy
6
in
Religion & Spirituality