4 ms·
Much cleaner versions is: Atheism is lack of beliefe in deity due to lack of evidence of any such/any deity. This pushes the burden of proof onto believers.
by me_me_me 3y ago
Much cleaner versions is:
Atheism is lack of beliefe in deity due to lack of evidence of any such/any deity.
This pushes the burden of proof onto believers.
- jncfhnb 3y agoThis line of thinking is useful for rejecting others who are pushing specific beliefs, but is demonstrably flawed for making conclusions about things that are intrinsically impossible to observe.
- JohnFen 3y agoThe thing is that it isn't a conclusion at all -- it's more of a suspension of arriving at a conclusion due to a lack of evidence supporting one.
- jncfhnb 3y agoIt “should” be
- me_me_me 3y ago> impossible to observe. Meaning those things don't exist. If a thing makes no interactions with our universe by definition it doesn't exists
- JohnFen 3y agoAs an atheist, I don't actually care where people think the "burden of proof" lies, honestly. I have seen no evidence that there is a god, and that's all that matters to me. I have no interest in debating the existence or nonexistence of a god, so I have no need to prove or disprove anything.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoStrictly speaking, no. There does not have to be any reason to not have a belief, although the one you cite will be common among those who have considered it. And you could still be an atheist even if there was evidence of a deity.
- me_me_me 3y ago> And you could still be an atheist even if there was evidence of a deity. Ummmm,sure maybe proof is a better word than evidence. But if there was, it would be hard to justify staying atheist.