(October 27, 2015 at 11:42 pm)Delicate Wrote:(October 27, 2015 at 11:06 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Again, I am only in the position to respond to theists claims that a god exists.
My only assertion is that demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic have not been presented. And that is all that I need to defend.
Until you assert that you have demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic for your god, I have no need to substantiate anything.
If you want to open another thread and present your evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic to support your god claim, I will be more than glad to substantiate my assertion that it does not meet that criteria.
You don't quite seem to grasp basic logic, skepticism, what constitutes good evidence, where the burden of proof lies, and probably more.
For now, I am out of here for the night.
That may be all you need to defend, but you're certainly not doing a good job of defending it.
You have not presented any thing I need to refute. I have yet had to defend my assertion that it does not live up to the criteria.
Quote:You haven't substantiated the claim or provide any specifics, which is needed for a successful defense. Have people attempted to provide you demonstrable evidence in the past and you've found problems with their demonstrations? What did they try to demonstrate and how did it fail? This is needed for a successful defense of your claim as well.
Seriously, how dense are you?
What do you think I have not defended? You have yet to provide anything that you believe constitutes demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic for the god you are claiming exists. As soon as you do, I will defend my assertion that it does not live up to the criteria I have been mentioning.
Yes. Everything that I have heard from theists does not pass the criteria.
The list of the arguments theists have used is too long to mention here.
Quote:In addition, further questions arise from your request for me to present my evidence- before you have even seen my evidence, how can you claim to substantiate your assertion that it doesn't meet your criteria? You haven't even seen the evidence yet! Unless you have a faith-based commitment to atheism that lets you know of its failure before seeing it...
I can make that assertion because I have heard and debated every argument from theists.
Unless you have some new, never before thought of argument or evidence, I am 100% confident that your arguments are just as flawed as everything presented for 1000's of years.
Quote:So you have failed to substantiate your claim, and your atheism seems faith-based. Maybe you can take care of that when you wake up tomorrow.
How do you know I can't substantiate my claim?
How is basing my disbelief on the existence of a god on the lack of evidence, reasoned argument, and valid/sound logic a faith based position?
Is your disbelief in bigfoot, alien abductions, Loch Ness monster, crystal healing, etc, etc a faith based position?
Quote:And I haven't even gotten to your unsubstantiated assertion that I don't seem to grasp basic logic, skepticism, etc. What's the evidence for that?
Almost every post of yours on this forum.
Quote:Your case looks very weak, as it would fail to convince even to a dispassionate skeptic.
How do you know how weak my case is? You haven't presented an argument for the existence of your god yet for me to respond to.
You continue to fail to see where the burden of proof lies. Not surprised, but it is frustrating. [/quote]
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
