[extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition...

[Joseph Bloch]

Mike,

I must disagree with you here. Few atheists I know, myself included, 
would say that they definitively know god(s) do not exist. Rather, in 
the absence of any evidence to support the (positive) claim that god(s) 
_do_ exist, the default position must be that they do not; it is not a 
claim that requires evidence, as you intimate, since the burden of proof 
is on those making the positive claim. And, connected therewith, I'm 
sure that almost everyone out there who declares thay they definitively 
do not believe in god(s) would change that opinion in the face of truly 
incontravertable evidence (just as I, who does not believe in the Loch 
Ness Monster, would immediately change that opinion if one were to be 
hauled up in a net tomorrow). Alas, religion to date has failed to 
provide such evidence.

And your appeal to the Simulation Argument, as if it were some panacea 
to the question of the existence of god(s), seems quite incongruous. 
Could you elaborate on why you think it points to proof of the existence 
of god(s)?

Joseph

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, or
>other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... is a claim
>to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation
>Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available.
>