Better reasons to quit Christianity

[spockrates]

Private pastimes aside, it seems to me the no proof debate is a wash. Christians say atheists have no proof there is no God; atheists say Christians have no proof there is a God. I think there might be reasonable reasons to believe there is a God, just as there are reasonable reasons to believer there is not. But it's possible neither side meets the other side's burden of proof, I think. What do you think?

Is it? Do you have the same care regarding leprechauns, fairies, goblins and all other conceptual beings that the human imagination has come up with?

And what the hell is a reasonable reason? (redundancy much?)

And here is a re-post as you seemed to have not read it: The null hipothesis

Yes, thanks for the link. I'd say I'm not asking for proof, I'm asking for reasons to reject, or fail to reject the hypothesis. Hope that helps.

Here is a link from the same website for you to get a better understanding of what I'm trying to convey:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

From that site:


Arguments that appeal to ignorance rely merely on the fact that the veracity of the proposition is not disproven to arrive at a definite conclusion. These arguments fail to appreciate that the limits of one's understanding or certainty do not change what is true. They do not inform upon reality. That is, whatever the reality is, it does not “wait” upon human logic or analysis to be formulated. Reality exists at all times, and it exists independently of what is in the mind of anyone. And the true thrust of science and rational analysis is to separate preconceived notion(s) of what reality is, and to be open at all times to the observation of nature as it behaves, so as truly to discover reality. This fallacy can be very convincing and is considered by some to be a special case of a false dilemma or false dichotomy in that they both fail to consider alternatives. A false dilemma may take the form:

• If a proposition has not been disproven, then it cannot be considered false and must therefore be considered true.
  
• If a proposition has not been proven, then it cannot be considered true and must therefore be considered false.
  

Such arguments attempt to exploit the facts that (a) true things can never be disproven and (b) false things can never be proven. In other words, appeals to ignorance claim that the converse of these facts are also true (therein lies the fallacy).


What I'm thinking is that both Christians (who say God is not disproven, and so the idea of him cannot be considered false) and atheist (who say God is not proven, and so the idea of him cannot be considered true) commit the same fallacy. Both ways of thinking are illogical. I'm not saying all atheist think this way. I'm saying those who do are committing the same informal logical fallacy and just as guilty of fuzzy thinking as some Christians are.