I exist is about the only thing I am 100% certain of--that and the current moment how I feel. But the world could be six seconds old, and just really vivid memories are implanted.
I disagree with your assessment that I need positive proof.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When such evidence is lacking, it is completely justified to believe that such claims are bogus.
And no, Dawkins does *not* need to offer evidence as to why God does not exist. All he needs to do is sufficiently undermine any argument put forth that God does exist. The default for "does X exist?" is No. Until evidence is provided, it is perfectly reasonable to deny the existence of something.
I cannot imagine how you came to conclude: "Well, sorry, if you're going to tell someone they are *wrong*, then you need some evidence of that. "
That's nonsense of the worst variety. I thought you understood how the burden of proof worked. What happened?
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2014-07-08 04:58 pm (UTC)I disagree with your assessment that I need positive proof.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When such evidence is lacking, it is completely justified to believe that such claims are bogus.
And no, Dawkins does *not* need to offer evidence as to why God does not exist. All he needs to do is sufficiently undermine any argument put forth that God does exist. The default for "does X exist?" is No. Until evidence is provided, it is perfectly reasonable to deny the existence of something.
I cannot imagine how you came to conclude: "Well, sorry, if you're going to tell someone they are *wrong*, then you need some evidence of that. "
That's nonsense of the worst variety. I thought you understood how the burden of proof worked. What happened?