Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo
No. An atheist does not believe that there is any god or gods. An atheist believes other stuff. It would be "a belief" if there were any evidence.
No problem. It's still just semantics though.
Evidence for God would disprove the claim that there is no God
Evidence against God would disprove the claim there is a God.
The fact that there is no evidence puts the question in limbo. And either position is a BELIEF.
It's kind of like Schroedinger's Cat - the cat is not dead or alive till you have the evidence according to Quantum Physicists...you're argument is just that of the hidebound old traditional Scientist who can't grasp the New Physics; that the Cat MUST be dead until evidence shows it is alive.
It's old. It's limited. And it's a belief.
And worse than that - if it were provable that God does not exist no atheist anywhere would resort to this argument...they'd get out and find the proof. Because they can't they have to resort to wordplay to win their points.
In the absolute, total absence of evidence of the existence of god (and there is no evidence, none, at all, nothing), an atheist can be perfectly interested in the philosophical question and perfectly able to state their disbelief, and perfectly content with their answer.
There is absolute total absence of evidence for many things. That's why we are entitle to believe what we like about things in those areas.
I'll save you the labour: there is no evidence that god exists. It is impossible for you to find proof. There is none.
I don't need labour-saving devices....I never believed there was evidence for God. It's more that I do not feel the need to dictate that everything needs evidence.
Why do you use a small 'g' btw? Is it deliberate? Interesting if so...is it like the Jews who have to write 'G-d' ?
Be ironic if it had a similar root to the religious usage.
Understanding that there is none, the atheist is simply opting out of the argument. There is no point in asking the question, because there is no evidence. The atheist is not taking a position of belief.
That is the height of intellectual dishonesty we have reached here so far. Or depth maybe.
If atheists 'opted out of the argument' then we would not have this thread, Sam Harris would not write or sell books and no-one here would be voicing an opinion.
Far from 'opting out of the argument' atheists have taken the argument home, ripped off its clothes while tying it to the bed and stuffed full of viagra they are subjecting the argument to every form of perversion and abuse ever devised by man or beast.
There is evidence for the existence of neutrinos, and I believe they exist, even though I have never seen one. There is no evidence for the existence of god, none, nothing, and I shouldn't even have to take a position if I don't want to. If you can provide any evidence, once you have collected your Nobel Prize come back here and I'll tell you if I've changed my position.
You don't have to. No-one is asking you to.
My allegiance is more to rational thought than God but I am starting to think that it is far more likely I will encounter the Deity Himself before I see any evidence of that here.