Total Posts:136|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The best way to discredit atheism

Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:49:39 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have seen no evidence of such a being but I cannot rule out the possible existence of such a being. That is my position, pending further evidence. The jury, as they say, is out but without evidence I will function with the default position.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:53:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:49:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have seen no evidence of such a being but I cannot rule out the possible existence of such a being. That is my position, pending further evidence. The jury, as they say, is out but without evidence I will function with the default position.

So the default position is no position. Correct?
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:56:05 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have yet to see the non-existence of something demonstrated with evidence. Conversely, I have never heard of outrageous subjects being assumed to exist based on the traits given it, as opposed to something objective to said thing's existence.

"God shall be defined" <------ and that is where it gets lost. Nothing specifically points to that definition. At all. What if it was some other incredibly powerful agent of some variety? The minute one describes what specifically God is, the window of objectivity begins to close, and the door of subjectivity opens wide.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:57:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:53:55 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:49:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have seen no evidence of such a being but I cannot rule out the possible existence of such a being. That is my position, pending further evidence. The jury, as they say, is out but without evidence I will function with the default position.

So the default position is no position. Correct?

The default position is that something asserted with no evidence is rejected based on that lack. That does not deny the possibility, it just rejects that particular assertion. It's as if I claimed that there was a leprechaun living under a toadstool in my back yard. The vast majority of sane people would demand evidence before accepting the assertion. Without it, they would reject the assertion in favor of the default position, pending actual evidence. That's my position, rejecting the assertion and living as if that were true while still accepting the possibility, however unproven it is. It's not quite as simple as you try to make it.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:03:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

Please show us that your defined God exists, that would be your burden of proof. My position will always remain the same, to be convinced of your proof or not. Thanks.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:04:14 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.
God shall be defined as a six legged frog with two heads is as valid as your claim.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:05:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:56:05 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.



I have yet to see the non-existence of something demonstrated with evidence. Conversely, I have never heard of outrageous subjects being assumed to exist based on the traits given it, as opposed to something objective to said thing's existence.

Easy. There are no four-sides triangles based on the law of non-contradiction. "Dragons don't live in my garage" is evidenced each time I go in and out of my garage. Evidence of absence. We begin every hypothesis with assumptions that we later seek to prove.

"God shall be defined" <------ and that is where it gets lost. Nothing specifically points to that definition. At all. What if it was some other incredibly powerful agent of some variety? The minute one describes what specifically God is, the window of objectivity begins to close, and the door of subjectivity opens wide.

Not at all. It sets an objective, workable criteria. The next step is to see what evidence favors or disfavors the existence of such a being.
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:06:26 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

For me, and many others I think, it is not a yes/no/I don't know question so much as a question of probabilities. The questions/answers which best describe my view are these:

Do you believe in God? No.
Does God exist? I don't know.
Is it possible for God to exist? I don't know.
Is it probable that God exists? I don't believe so.
Is it probable that God does not exist? I believe so.

Hopefully, that dispenses with the strawman characterizations (riiiight...)

Further expanding upon this (greatly expanding upon this) is a fascinating debate between Christian apologist William Lane Craig and theoretical physicist Sean Carroll:

http://youtu.be...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:08:21 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Why do people seriously believe that the "negative position" is the default one?

So, if I believe that there are no composite objects (ie. no chairs, tables, bodies, etc), then mereological nihilism is the default position? What about no minds? What about eliminative materialism (no inner subjective experiences)? Etc.

Not to mention that as a simple fact of logic, all double negative statements are logically equivalent to a positive statement. the distinction is meaningless in this context, if I can shift the burden of proof merely by converting a positive statement into a negative statement that is logically equivalent.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:10:02 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:57:55 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:53:55 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:49:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have seen no evidence of such a being but I cannot rule out the possible existence of such a being. That is my position, pending further evidence. The jury, as they say, is out but without evidence I will function with the default position.

So the default position is no position. Correct?

The default position is that something asserted with no evidence is rejected based on that lack. That does not deny the possibility, it just rejects that particular assertion. It's as if I claimed that there was a leprechaun living under a toadstool in my back yard. The vast majority of sane people would demand evidence before accepting the assertion. Without it, they would reject the assertion in favor of the default position, pending actual evidence. That's my position, rejecting the assertion and living as if that were true while still accepting the possibility, however unproven it is. It's not quite as simple as you try to make it.

This is exactly why I created this topic. You assume a rationally unjustifiable positon.

Tell me if you reject these statements or simply have no positon:

A man named Whingzan lives in China.

Alien life exist.

There is a dead body on the summit of mt. Everest.

If you reject statements that have no evidence, then you should affirm that all of the above statements aren't true. Correct?

"Evidence" is just information indicating whether a proposition is true.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:12:40 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:03:44 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

Please show us that your defined God exists, that would be your burden of proof. My position will always remain the same, to be convinced of your proof or not. Thanks.

Just to be clear: you have no position on God's existence or non-existence. Correct?
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:14:53 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:06:26 PM, Fly wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

For me, and many others I think, it is not a yes/no/I don't know question so much as a question of probabilities. The questions/answers which best describe my view are these:

Do you believe in God? No.

What evidence supports that belief?

Does God exist? I don't know.

Is absence of evidence evidence of absence?

Is it possible for God to exist? I don't know.
Is it probable that God exists? I don't believe so.

Based on what evidence?

Is it probable that God does not exist? I believe so.

Based on what evidence?

Hopefully, that dispenses with the strawman characterizations (riiiight...)

Further expanding upon this (greatly expanding upon this) is a fascinating debate between Christian apologist William Lane Craig and theoretical physicist Sean Carroll:

http://youtu.be...
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:15:10 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
All gods are the inventions of man ergo six legged frogs with two heads.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:16:03 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:08:21 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why do people seriously believe that the "negative position" is the default one?

So, if I believe that there are no composite objects (ie. no chairs, tables, bodies, etc), then mereological nihilism is the default position? What about no minds? What about eliminative materialism (no inner subjective experiences)? Etc.

Not to mention that as a simple fact of logic, all double negative statements are logically equivalent to a positive statement. the distinction is meaningless in this context, if I can shift the burden of proof merely by converting a positive statement into a negative statement that is logically equivalent.

Good question!
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:16:41 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?

To be honest, I have none. But the question about who created the Universe for example could be answered in two flawed ways, the theist and the atheist.

Atheist way: Big Bang happened from a tinier version of the universe. The Universe has always existed.
Theist way: God created it. And if you ask me who created God, the answer is he has always existed.

But I regard most religions as tools for either just having a cosmic teddybear or ruling over people. We could reduce the discussion to disproving the Abrahamic religions. For example, the Exodus lacks archeological evidence.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:17:09 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?

The complete lack of evidence for gods/goddesses existence.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:20:33 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:05:08 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:56:05 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.



I have yet to see the non-existence of something demonstrated with evidence. Conversely, I have never heard of outrageous subjects being assumed to exist based on the traits given it, as opposed to something objective to said thing's existence.

Easy. There are no four-sides triangles based on the law of non-contradiction.

Conversely, there is no agent that is real that lives outside of reality, or intelligent being without experience of reality. So goes your definition of God.

"Dragons don't live in my garage" is evidenced each time I go in and out of my garage.
Evidence of absence. We begin every hypothesis with assumptions that we later seek to prove.

This would mean such an "absence" is credible as evidence against God. So, Ben, does that fly?


"God shall be defined" <------ and that is where it gets lost. Nothing specifically points to that definition. At all. What if it was some other incredibly powerful agent of some variety? The minute one describes what specifically God is, the window of objectivity begins to close, and the door of subjectivity opens wide.

Not at all. It sets an objective, workable criteria.

How is something that already exists both objective and workable in terms of criteria?

The next step is to see what evidence favors or disfavors the existence of such a being.

The host of "evidence of absence" you alluded to earlier seems like a pretty good start.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:23:18 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:10:02 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:57:55 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:53:55 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:49:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I have seen no evidence of such a being but I cannot rule out the possible existence of such a being. That is my position, pending further evidence. The jury, as they say, is out but without evidence I will function with the default position.

So the default position is no position. Correct?

The default position is that something asserted with no evidence is rejected based on that lack. That does not deny the possibility, it just rejects that particular assertion. It's as if I claimed that there was a leprechaun living under a toadstool in my back yard. The vast majority of sane people would demand evidence before accepting the assertion. Without it, they would reject the assertion in favor of the default position, pending actual evidence. That's my position, rejecting the assertion and living as if that were true while still accepting the possibility, however unproven it is. It's not quite as simple as you try to make it.

This is exactly why I created this topic. You assume a rationally unjustifiable positon.

Tell me if you reject these statements or simply have no positon:

A man named Whingzan lives in China.

I don't know. It is possible.

Alien life exist.

I don't know. It is possible.

There is a dead body on the summit of mt. Everest.

I don't know. It is possible.

If you reject statements that have no evidence, then you should affirm that all of the above statements aren't true. Correct?

I can hold the position that I don't know but I can assign a level of probability to it based in information I do have. It's not unjustifiable to say I don't know but since I have no evidence I will function as if it is not true. If it is demonstrated to be true I will change both my stance on the assertion and possibly change my daily functions based on new data. We do this all the time. Do you believe in unicorns? Does your belief or lack of belief affect your daily life? You see, you're making a mountain of a molehill. Heck it's barely a bump on the ground.

"Evidence" is just information indicating whether a proposition is true.

Exactly, and without it the default position is that it is not true while not discounting the possibility that I am mistaken.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:25:35 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:16:41 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?

To be honest, I have none. But the question about who created the Universe for example could be answered in two flawed ways, the theist and the atheist.

So wouldn't the most rational position be to neither favor not disfavor God's existence?

Atheist way: Big Bang happened from a tinier version of the universe. The Universe has always existed.
Theist way: God created it. And if you ask me who created God, the answer is he has always existed.

But I regard most religions as tools for either just having a cosmic teddybear or ruling over people. We could reduce the discussion to disproving the Abrahamic religions. For example, the Exodus lacks archeological evidence.

I have a few things to say on this but I'll stop here for now. My purpose in creating this topic show that the burden of proof lies on both parties if you have a position.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:27:49 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:17:09 PM, desmac wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?

The complete lack of evidence for gods/goddesses existence.

Evidence is defined as information indicating whether a proposition is true. So what you're affirming is that 0 information indicating whether a proposition is true acts as information affirming that the proposition is not true?
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:29:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:12:40 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:44 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

Please show us that your defined God exists, that would be your burden of proof. My position will always remain the same, to be convinced of your proof or not. Thanks.

Just to be clear: you have no position on God's existence or non-existence. Correct?

Did you not read or did you not understand my response?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:32:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:14:53 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:06:26 PM, Fly wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

For me, and many others I think, it is not a yes/no/I don't know question so much as a question of probabilities. The questions/answers which best describe my view are these:

Do you believe in God? No.

What evidence supports that belief?

You stubbornly and predictably miss this one-- it is not a belief; it is a lack of belief.

Does God exist? I don't know.

Is absence of evidence evidence of absence?

Sometimes. Now, how does your question follow my answer "I don't know"?

Is it possible for God to exist? I don't know.
Is it probable that God exists? I don't believe so.

Based on what evidence?

Exactly.

Is it probable that God does not exist? I believe so.

Based on what evidence?

How much time do you have to spare? Again, I refer you to the video. It is a remarkable debate between two expert debaters. I find myself agreeing with everything Dr. Carroll argues. Your mileage may vary...

Hopefully, that dispenses with the strawman characterizations (riiiight...)

Further expanding upon this (greatly expanding upon this) is a fascinating debate between Christian apologist William Lane Craig and theoretical physicist Sean Carroll:

http://youtu.be...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:32:52 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:08:21 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Why do people seriously believe that the "negative position" is the default one?

When it comes to existence? I think that is pretty logical, really. Assume something doesn't exist until such time as its existence is given evidence for, or such thing is ultimately revealed.

As a for instance: do you know about "Bob in Oklahoma"? Before I told you about Bob in Oklahoma, regarding Bob in Oklahoma's existence, what was your position on his existence?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:34:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 5:27:49 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:17:09 PM, desmac wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:11:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 5:03:08 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:59:54 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:54:02 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists? If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief. Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

I am somewhat atheist. I don't have any evidence, so I concede. I neither have any evidence disproving the argument of "There is a teapot floating around in the Andromeda Galaxy right now", so I concede about that one too, even if you never mentioned it. Now the burden of proof is on you, the burden of proving God exists. Best of luck.

Do you affirm this statement:: "You are equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence."

I would not let my spiritual guesses be reduced solely to the Abrahamic concept of a monotheist God, but I would maybe say I'm 90/10 concerning non-existence/existence.

So what evidence leads you to favor God's non-existence?

The complete lack of evidence for gods/goddesses existence.

Evidence is defined as information indicating whether a proposition is true. So what you're affirming is that 0 information indicating whether a proposition is true acts as information affirming that the proposition is not true?

Why make the proposition when you have no evidence either way?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 5:36:18 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 4:46:15 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Do you have a position on whether or not God exists?

No

If you don't have a position, aren't you equally in favor of God's existence as you are for God's non-existence?

No, that woud be idiotic. You can't know for a fact I didn't fvck your mom, but anyone with a brain knows you should take the skeptical positiion.

If you do have a position on God's existence, you can't be lacking belief.

Untrue, lacking belief means you don't believe in a God. You lack thag positive belief, are you trolling or stupid?

Don't you have the exact same burden of proof to affirm God's nonexistence as someone affirming God's existence?

Yes you would have the same BOP for both. As has been told to you before, atheisgs lack belief and that question is not one that accurately portrays the atheist position. You can't possibly be this stupid. Are you trolling? If you're. Ot trollling please don"t reproduce.

? If not, is absence of evidence evidence of absence? If yes, what's your evidence that God doesn't exist?

God shall be defined as the eternal, intelligent creator of the universe.

Idiot