RE: street epistemology
December 25, 2015 at 3:15 pm
(This post was last modified: December 25, 2015 at 3:16 pm by Simon Moon.)
(December 24, 2015 at 7:38 pm)Delicate Wrote:(December 24, 2015 at 7:29 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Either way.
It is still up to you to provide your evidence, then we'll assess it to determine if it is: demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable and stands up to reasoned argument, and is logically valid and sound.
I'm not about to guess what evidence you claim to have, then dismiss it as not being convincing without first examining it.
Please, open a thread, present your evidence so it can be assessed.
If it's up to me to provide evidence, and I haven't, then your atheism isn't based on analyzing and debunking any evidence, is it?
Your atheism can only be based on blind incompetence, as you admit.
You not any where near as bright as you think you are.
I am an atheist based on the complete lack of a compelling case every theist has been able provide for the existence of their god, up until now.
My atheism is, and has always been, a provisional position, not a dogmatic one.
As long as theists fail to provide demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable evidence, reasoned argument and valid and sound logic to support their claim that a god exists, I will continue to be an atheist.
So...
Are you going to continue to talk crap, or are you going to provide your evidence?
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.
