Do atheists know that their physical senses are the only ones? What would they say to a blind man who said there are only four senses, denying the existence of the sense of sight. He demands evidence from you as to the existence of color as an asthetic concept. What would you say?
I would read him a scientific explanation of the way eyes process vision and the way light creates color. If he still didn't believe me, I would leave him to his own devices because I don't really care. If this man wants to not believe in vision, that's his choice. It doesn't make my believes in vision any less valid.
It's reasonable to deny something if you have no proof of it. If nobody has taken the time to prove to this blind man that color and vision exist, there is no reason he should believe it. However, this is not really analogous to the existence of a God because we have scientific proof of vision and color and we do not have this proof of God. Because this analogy doesn't work, it is completely irrelevant whether or not I'm an atheist. We're not discussing God. We are discussing colors.
If I tell you I'm an AI created by Martians, debating with you to gain intelligence on humans, you have no reason to believe me. Could I be an AI? Maybe, but the chance is so low that it isn't worth your time investigating it. It makes much more sense for you to go on living your life, believing there are no Martian AIs.
Well, I do have evidence that color exists. That's what he asked me to find, and I did. I just proved it. Why do you get to decide the blind man's reaction? Can you provide a reason why the blind man might not believe me? If not, it's unreasonable to assume that he would reject my proof.
I did not ask you for an example, but proof of your claim that it is reasonable to infer non-existence from no evidence. You failed to provide any. Indeed, your position is irrational. The only thing you can infer from non-evidence is that no answeR is possible. Like a good atheist, you failed Logic 101.
And the blind man says your "evidence" is merely evidence you are deluded. And he did not ask you to find evidence color exists, but to prove to him color exists. You failed. As I said, now you know why we Christians see your denial of reality is evidence you are mentally ill. And h
I believe my example showed a very reasonable reaction to lack of evidence. Are you implying that this reaction was not reasonable?
In the blind man's experience, there is no vision. It makes no sense of him that color is real. The BOP is on me, so if I fail to prove that there is vision and color, he is reasonable in persisting with his belief that there is no vision or color. However, I did not fail.
Why do you get to decide what the blind man is saying? I believe the pages I cited do prove that color exists, and you have not actually refuted that with anything logical. You give no reason why my articles do not stand as proof; instead you persist in telling me that the blind man isn't convinced. You tell me that I am wrong, but you do not back up that claim.
You told me to prove the existence of color of a blind man. I did. You did not present any evidence that would convince someone to believe I didn't. I have won this debate.