Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 21, 2009 at 5:46 pm
What I am challenging is where the debate is....
And why doesn't science have a part in it?
And if it does, as I believe it does - and its a scientific debate too - then the argument starts with the burden of proof on the theist and not on the atheist...so if the theist doesn't give evidence then the atheist is already winning anyway - right?
I am asking where the debate IS here...what is so debatable?
I just can't imagine debating about Zeus or the FSM and the Zeus/FSM believer 'winning the debate' simply because the atheist made the logical fallacy of claiming Zeus or the FSM was absolutely disproved...
Well yeah, the atheist made a fallacy...but IF this is partly a scientific debate then there IS the matter of the fact that the Zeus/FSM believer as already losing from the outset for not giving any evidence for Zeus/the FSM!
IF it's also a scientific debate...that is
I am arguing that it is indeed a scientific debate too and that so the burden of proof and evidence would come into play; and that I never saw the part that this was specified to be specifically a philosophical argument and not at all scientific and so that the burden of proof and evidence doesn't come into play, only the logical argument..
I did not see where it stated in the OP that the debate was or had to be entirely philosophical. AND I am personally arguing that science also fits into the equation here and that evidence and existence therefore matters and not just the logical argument.
EvF
Posts: 2375
Threads: 186
Joined: August 29, 2008
Reputation:
38
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 11:13 am
I agree that science has something to say about God and this idea that they are non-overlapping is nonsense. The point being made is not whether science has something to say but that in a formal debate it's possible to lose if science is on your side if you don't present your arguments logically and correctly.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Well I guess if it was me then the first thing that would be established is that until the Christian accepts the fact that he needs evidence of God FIRST - we don't need evidence AGAINST it - then he has lost by default.
I would think that the Christian had lost from the outset in the debate...not by what was said - but by what was NOT said....
The Christian side didn't give any evidence of God...so by default the atheist side is right.
And then when the atheist side makes the logical fallacy of saying you can prove God's non-existence then sure....if we are to ignore the above line it looks like the atheists have lost....
But really the Christians have all the burden on them right from the outset. You need evidence for nonsense....
If I said that Zeus was absolutely disproved in a debate...would I have lost the debate?
Or would they be ahead because by default it is assumed they are the logical ones anyway - even if they are committing a fallacy - it is still by default far more likely to be the truth that Zeus does NOT exist.....he's just not disproved that's all.
Or....would the Zeus believer have won? There is no logic to assume that the atheist still had the upper hand because its FAR more likely that Zeus doesn't exist by default (no evidence, burden of proof, etc)?
If you claim negative proof you have lost even if probability is till on your side? Maybe you should be ALMOST 100% sure rather than 100% sure....but that's still likely to be a lot closer to the truth than believer in Zeus/God right from the outset with no proof or evidence whatsoever right!
So my conclusion is despite the negative proof fallacy....the logic and probability is still a lot more on the atheists side by default...if science applies part in this debate then logically you need to give evidence of your totally unsupported claim of belief in ZEUS! or "God"!
Otherwise you are losing by default.
EvF
P.S: Before I said already lost by default...I think this is an ongoing thing and there is no absolute proof or disproof....
So its not right to say lost or won by default....losing or winning is better...
Logic is already on the atheist's side by default...because the atheist doesn't have a massively exaggerated gigantic belief based on absolutely no evidence right from the outset!
And I don't think claiming absolute proof and being 100% certain of no God...with a fallacy like that - rather than being 'merely' 99.99999999999999 recurring practically infinitely sure or whatever - is enough of a blunder to make up for the fact the believer in Zeus/"God" (whatever kind of supernatural "God") - is still claiming belief in this absolutely absurd diety with nothing logical to back it up whatsoever!
I think the Christian would still be losing right from the start! Logically! If you claim a totally absurd belief based on no evidence - you need to back it up. If someone then claims negative proof - yes that's a fallacy - but that doesn't make you the WINNER! In your belief in Zeus/Thor/Ra/FSM/"God"/whatever!
Does it?
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Like I said EvF, you clearly have no idea how debates work.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 7:01 pm
Well the Christian had already claimed that God existed first though right? They're a Christian...so they obviously claim that - it's what they believe right? That their God exists...
Isn't it all eyes on them first?
Or are we supposed to assume they are a Christian that DOESN'T believe in God? If they haven't explicitly stated that they do? If they have 'merely' said that they are Christian? And not claimed it...when they of course do.
Posts: 2375
Threads: 186
Joined: August 29, 2008
Reputation:
38
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 8:48 pm
The point is that the burden of proof shifted once the guy accepted that premise.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: Outsmarted by a Christian, need help to contradict
March 24, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Well if its about burden of proof here then....
I didn't think that making a second claim would shift the burden of proof from the first claim....
If the first claim isn't remotely backed up and is closer to the truth then I thought that the burden of proof would still be on the first claim...
If science doesn't fit into the equation and this is just a philosophical debate and this is just about logic...
Then I guess an atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer by committing a logical fallacy right? Because its just about the arguments so the fact there's a massive claim with no evidence and the burden of proof is on that claim - then that wouldn't matter...
If the atheist commits a logical fallacy in the matter of a debate just about philosophical arguments and completely excluding truth, evidence, the burden of proof and science, etc - then the atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer JUST as easily right?
So if they lose the debate or argument then that's meaningless in the sense they could just have easily lost to someone who believes in Zeus or the FSM!
The Christian God is not to be regarded as any more special than Zeus...so it doesn't really matter who 'wins the debate' if the atheist could just have easily lost to a pastafarian who genuinely believes in the FSM.....
Lol.
EvF