(October 2, 2013 at 4:16 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(October 2, 2013 at 3:23 pm)Rational AKD Wrote: burden of proof doesn't just apply to claim of "X" exists, but also "X" does not exist. to be more accurate, it would be proposition X is true. this includes not just positive existence claims, but also negative existence claims. a negating position such as "God doesn't exist" is not a default position. the default position is one of ignorance such as "God may or may not exist but I don't know."
There are 2 truth claims concerning the existence of a god.
1. A god exists
2. A god does not exist
Both truth claims have to be examined separately. Disbelieving the first claim, does not mean that an atheist believes the second by default.
Um not so fast. I am an atheist and depending on time frame I DO CLAIM that a god does not exist.
As far as past and current claims I DO CALL BULLSHIT on them and rule them out as any they say " a snowball's chance in hell".
I am only and strictly semantically regarding the future "agnostic".
It all depends upon the individual atheist as to the degree of agnosticism. I am only "agnostic" about the future. I am dead certain that everything so far is way beyond worth saving from the trash can of bad claims. And even with my "agnosticism" about the future, even then, my "bets" are on it remaining all bullshit.
