It is in fact philosophically unnassailable to suggest the other side has no proof, and wait for that proof, and in the absense of that proof, declare victory.
The Presumption of Atheism requires no defense, it merely waits for that proof.
It has not been given.
2006-09-27 09:34:23 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hmmm, your question seems somewhat familiar...
Like Phoenix stated, the burden of proof lies with those who claim god exists, as far as the proof that Beta fish seems to think is proof, please elaborate.
Proof is only proof when there is no question as to it's authenticity. The bible would not be considered adequate proof in any court of law due to it's contradictions and inconsistencies.
2006-09-28 07:42:11 · answer #1 · answered by JerseyRick 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jimmy D: You are confusing Atheism for Agnosticism. Atheism INSISTS that there is no diety or divinity. What sort of "waiting for proof" is that?
Agnostics, however, willfully admit that they do not know. it's the agnostic mantra to wait for the fateful Day of Irrefutable Evidence. One day, the Day of Irrefutable Evidence will come and we will all know The Truth - whatever that might be.
This all sounds very logical, of course, but there are even semi-religious nuances of how this is all said. For example: "whatever that might be" is said in a surprisingly similar way as "hallowed be Thy name."
Our hymn might also be "The Evidence Will Come" which sounds a lot like "We Will Overcome." Of course, all of these specific nuances are likewise speculation as we Agnostics do not get together for any particular reason nor are we sure whether we should or not. It might happen by accident now and then though...
You never know for sure,
Cheshire Cat
2006-09-29 19:51:10 · answer #2 · answered by Cheshire Cat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As it is impossible to prove something does not exist, it must then be up to those who propose the positive (e.g. God exists) to prove their hypothesis.
Those who believe God does not exist cannot do anything but wait for evidence proving them wrong.
However, that undermines the whole concept of faith - to believe with no clear evidence for doing so. Thus, to prove God would be to disprove faith.
So, to maintain the God religions, followers should merely ignore those who seek proof and accept their lack of faith. Non-followers will have to wait until the evidence simply presents itself. And we are at an impasse.
2006-09-27 16:44:49 · answer #3 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course defense of Atheism is presumed non-existent.
Why or how could you defend nothing?
There must be two sides for a victory treat, no?
If one sits passively defending nothing, which persona has decided there was anything to be defensive of?
2006-09-27 16:43:55 · answer #4 · answered by dyke_in_heat 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very true. The ones claiming an existance of something must carry the burden of proof. Us atheists just see no proof exists.
2006-09-27 16:40:46 · answer #5 · answered by Spookshow Baby 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't. Much like the homosexual that feels the need to inform others their sexual preference.....
Heterosexual women and men don't go around saying, "I'm heterosexual"
Don't get all up in arms everyone, I'm only giving an analogy.
2006-09-28 15:32:09 · answer #6 · answered by peppermint_paddy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Proof has been presented over and over again. You simply don't like the evidence.
2006-09-27 16:41:03 · answer #7 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simple and straight to the point. Who can argue with that? Not me.
2006-09-28 09:00:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Awww...sure it has....you know, that Dr. Dino or answergenesis thing?
I mean, you don't accept the book that SAYS it's true to be true, you don't accept websites with opinions and circular logic, you sure are tough to please =)
2006-09-27 16:43:50 · answer #9 · answered by ♥Mira♥ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who says it does?
2006-09-27 16:40:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋