Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gldnrule: "It IS illogical to make a determination off of a premise of "there is no evidence".
From a Pure Logic standpoint...the ONLY guaranteed true conclusion you can LOGICALLY make from "there is no evidence"...is that, "there is no evidence". Lack of evidence/proof indicates NOTHING BUT THAT...from a Pedigree Logic position."
You seem to be using a 'determination' as implying coming to a definite conclusion that something does not exist because of the lack of evidence for it. The 'determination' atheism makes is that because of lack of sound evidence for it, the claim that it does exist is invalid. This is not only logically sound, but logically mandatory. I cannot believe that you don't understand this and I think that you are just 'putting sand down' the atheist neck out of sheer mischief.
Oh, you ARE drawing a conclusion: Determining you should not believe in something, IS a conclusion...no matter how much you try to run from it or shuck & jive around it.
Again, how did you say you arrived at your not believing GOD(s) exist? WAIT!... I recall...it was because "there is no evidence what-so-ever on offer, etc, etc, etc"!
It IS illogical to make a determination off of a premise of "there is no evidence".
From a Pure Logic standpoint...the ONLY guaranteed true conclusion you can LOGICALLY make from "there is no evidence"...is that, "there is no evidence". Lack of evidence/proof indicates NOTHING BUT THAT...from a Pedigree Logic position.
Get hip to this: Any determination (in any way you want to describe the assessment) that is made based upon a premise of a lack of evidence...is a Logical Fallacy.
That doesn't necessarily make the determination false/wrong...just that it was made in a way that didn't follow the Pure Logic regulations.
A true conclusion is guaranteed to follow only a formally flawless argument, based upon a perfectly true premise.
Any flaw in the form of the argument or the premises...invalidates the deductive guarantee. The conclusion can then either be true or false.
You cannot logically base a conclusion (not even your "workable conclusion") on the absence of evidence, rather than the presence of evidence. But THAT is exactly what you do.
As far as "The Burden of Proof"...that obligation is upon the one making the "extraordinary", "remarkable", or "new" claim.
"God Exists" has been sooooooo prolific, for sooooooo long...it is considered a "Standard of Human Understanding".
When a concept reaches a "saturation point" that is to such a degree that it is considered to be "The Standard"...a position that deviates from that would be the "extraordinary/remarkable/new claim" that will have to prove itself against the long established standard.
Since "GOD EXISTS" is the looooooong established WORLD STANDARD...anyone that wants to contest that, is going to have to prove THEIR case.
Just like Galileo had to PROVE the universe DOES NOT revolve around the Earth, since that concept was in opposition to the "long established standard" that it did...the GOD(s) DOES NOT EXIST crew will have to back that up, if they want their concept to be accepted as valid. And good luck with that...it will be much harder for you than it was for Galileo...since he was right, and you are wrong. So far "The God Exists Concept" has "taken on all challengers" for thousands of years and "dusted them" like they weren't even there!!
You, et al, will just be the next ones to get trounced. You like "facts"?...Try THAT one!
Keep trying. You might get there one day Goldie. But not today ^^^.
I am not claiming I am not. I am just claiming that the conclusions and positions I am espousing are not the ones you are desperately assigning to me in your construction of your little straw man.
If there is no reason to think a claim is true then the claim should be dismissed and we should proceed as if the claim is false. That is all I have suggested. Anything else you add to that is coming out of your head, not mine, in a fetid desperate attempt to distort my actual position into one you think you can deal with.
And the fact is that the claim there is an intelligent consciousness behind the creation of our universe is an unsubstantiated claim that you have backed up with nothing but the composition fallacy, coupled with an attempt to shift the burden of proof using argumentum ad populum.
I am not claiming I am not. I am just claiming that the conclusions and positions I am espousing are not the ones you are desperately assigning to me in your construction of your little straw man.
If there is no reason to think a claim is true then the claim should be dismissed and we should proceed as if the claim is false. That is all I have suggested. Anything else you add to that is coming out of your head, not mine, in a fetid desperate attempt to distort my actual position into one you think you can deal with.
And the fact is that the claim there is an intelligent consciousness behind the creation of our universe is an unsubstantiated claim that you have backed up with nothing but the composition fallacy, coupled with an attempt to shift the burden of proof using argumentum ad populum.
You need to key on the "no reason to think" part of your statement.
If you have no evidence...The only LOGICAL conclusion that comports with a Pure Logic protocol...is NO conclusion.
Pure Logic needs objectively valid premises, following an argument of flawless form, that then assures a true deductive guarantee.
If you have "No evidence what-so-ever on offer" as a premises...your deal is blown right there. Because, evidence could exist...you just don't know it.
"No evidence" can't be used AS evidence. You need to get hip to that. I didn't make it that way...that's just the way it is.
As you know...I take no issue with Logical Fallacies...I use them and endorse them. I have no allergy to them.
But I guess some of you guys can add "LogicalFallaciphobia" to your afflictions.
But I know what reeeeeeally causes all the angst relative to the OP.
Fact is...Theism (God Belief/God Exists Concept) is the most powerful and world/people influencing thing/entity/concept EVER. Christianity is like the President & CEO, while Islam is the Executive Vice President.
And though this bothers the adherents to the concept: Atheism isn't, has never been, and probably never will be, much of a factor.
That IS the way it IS, that IS the way it has been, and that IS the way it IS going to be.
See, it doesn't matter whether the Bible & Christianity (or any other religious text or concept) as believed by the people who do can be determined to be "real" or "fake" through scientific analysis. The fact is, they ARE believed. Thus, the influence is the same...regardless of the concepts, doctrines, and stories actually being true or not.
I gave a "paper currency" analogy once: It's REALLY only paper and ink, and has no actual TRUE or intrinsic value. But as long as people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE it has value...it REALLY DOES have value.
And THAT is what REALLY counts in this world: What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE.
And most don't sweat headtrips about whether something passes the muster of the Scientific Method, pure logic, pure reason, empirical proof, or objective facts...none of that means squat when it comes to real influence in this world.
What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE is what matters to them, and thus motivates/influences them.
Which is why Theism is so incredibly powerful and influential...and Atheism is so, well, nuthin.
You need to key on the "no reason to think" part of your statement.
If you have no evidence...The only LOGICAL conclusion that comports with a Pure Logic protocol...is NO conclusion.
Pure Logic needs objectively valid premises, following an argument of flawless form, that then assures a true deductive guarantee.
If you have "No evidence what-so-ever on offer" as a premises...your deal is blown right there. Because, evidence could exist...you just don't know it.
"No evidence" can't be used AS evidence. You need to get hip to that. I didn't make it that way...that's just the way it is.
As you know...I take no issue with Logical Fallacies...I use them and endorse them. I have no allergy to them.
But I guess some of you guys can add "LogicalFallaciphobia" to your afflictions.
But I know what reeeeeeally causes all the angst relative to the OP.
Fact is...Theism (God Belief/God Exists Concept) is the most powerful and world/people influencing thing/entity/concept EVER. Christianity is like the President & CEO, while Islam is the Executive Vice President.
And though this bothers the adherents to the concept: Atheism isn't, has never been, and probably never will be, much of a factor.
That IS the way it IS, that IS the way it has been, and that IS the way it IS going to be.
See, it doesn't matter whether the Bible & Christianity (or any other religious text or concept) as believed by the people who do can be determined to be "real" or "fake" through scientific analysis. The fact is, they ARE believed. Thus, the influence is the same...regardless of the concepts, doctrines, and stories actually being true or not.
I gave a "paper currency" analogy once: It's REALLY only paper and ink, and has no actual TRUE or intrinsic value. But as long as people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE it has value...it REALLY DOES have value.
And THAT is what REALLY counts in this world: What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE.
And most don't sweat headtrips about whether something passes the muster of the Scientific Method, pure logic, pure reason, empirical proof, or objective facts...none of that means squat when it comes to real influence in this world.
What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE is what matters to them, and thus motivates/influences them.
Which is why Theism is so incredibly powerful and influential...and Atheism is so, well, nuthin.
I guess that is the last resort. When all other arguments fail simply go with it must be true because so many people believe it. My guess is the majority of people that actually believe in god must cringe when they hear that knowing how poor of an argument it is.
You need to key on the "no reason to think" part of your statement.
If you have no evidence...The only LOGICAL conclusion that comports with a Pure Logic protocol...is NO conclusion.
Pure Logic needs objectively valid premises, following an argument of flawless form, that then assures a true deductive guarantee.
If you have "No evidence what-so-ever on offer" as a premises...your deal is blown right there. Because, evidence could exist...you just don't know it.
"No evidence" can't be used AS evidence. You need to get hip to that. I didn't make it that way...that's just the way it is.
As you know...I take no issue with Logical Fallacies...I use them and endorse them. I have no allergy to them.
But I guess some of you guys can add "LogicalFallaciphobia" to your afflictions.
But I know what reeeeeeally causes all the angst relative to the OP.
Fact is...Theism (God Belief/God Exists Concept) is the most powerful and world/people influencing thing/entity/concept EVER. Christianity is like the President & CEO, while Islam is the Executive Vice President.
And though this bothers the adherents to the concept: Atheism isn't, has never been, and probably never will be, much of a factor.
That IS the way it IS, that IS the way it has been, and that IS the way it IS going to be.
See, it doesn't matter whether the Bible & Christianity (or any other religious text or concept) as believed by the people who do can be determined to be "real" or "fake" through scientific analysis. The fact is, they ARE believed. Thus, the influence is the same...regardless of the concepts, doctrines, and stories actually being true or not.
I gave a "paper currency" analogy once: It's REALLY only paper and ink, and has no actual TRUE or intrinsic value. But as long as people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE it has value...it REALLY DOES have value.
And THAT is what REALLY counts in this world: What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE.
And most don't sweat headtrips about whether something passes the muster of the Scientific Method, pure logic, pure reason, empirical proof, or objective facts...none of that means squat when it comes to real influence in this world.
What people BELIEVE/PERCEIVE is what matters to them, and thus motivates/influences them.
Which is why Theism is so incredibly powerful and influential...and Atheism is so, well, nuthin.
The paper money analogy is clever. But it points up the difference between human conventions, such as society, law, art, language and religion and intrinsic realities, such as physics, geography, archaeology, biology and mechanics. Those things are real, apart from human conventions.
Human conventions are designed by us for our convenience and we may change from one to the other as in precious metals to paper and then to plastic. They are our tools and anyone who has an insistence that he have to keep things as they are mistaking social conventions for intrinsic reality.
The only person who is deceived by your rather clever, but false analogy, is yourself.
And I'm glad that you like logical fallacies. The only problem is that you never seem to understand them. You really need to get hip to that, old son.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-19-2013 at 09:13 AM..
I guess that is the last resort. When all other arguments fail simply go with it must be true because so many people believe it. My guess is the majority of people that actually believe in god must cringe when they hear that knowing how poor of an argument it is.
It is a typical "last resort" to make accusations of something not done.
You wanna show me where you got me ever claiming "it must be true because so many people believe it"?
You need to reread my post. I never claimed that.
But I'm sure the false claim was in lieu of attempting a rebuttal of what I DID say.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
