Many thanks to those who thoughtfully accepted my invitation to comment on the points made by the author of the blog post “Philosopher Groans”. I’m glad to see that at least some of you are skeptical of this uniquely New Atheist staple asserting that atheism makes no knowledge claims. I did not raise the issue to pin the “burden of proof” on others so as to avoid it myself. Instead, I wanted to show that theists are not the only ones who think saying “there is no evidence for god(s)” makes a knowledge claim similar to something like “this bucket contains no water”.
On a related point, I feel conflicted about a particular response made by some that because there are so many types of god(s), a blanket doxastic position that none exist is justified. This seems like a reasonable position for a skeptic who is not inclined to speculate on philosophical issues. At the same time I think it overstates the problem. Polytheism, Classical Monotheism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Deism, and Polytheism exhaust the major categories. As such, interfaith dialog often revolves around specifics within each type, like two people debating whether a garden apartment is in a basement or actually on the first floor, or the degree to and means by which a particular type of God makes itself known.
On a related point, I feel conflicted about a particular response made by some that because there are so many types of god(s), a blanket doxastic position that none exist is justified. This seems like a reasonable position for a skeptic who is not inclined to speculate on philosophical issues. At the same time I think it overstates the problem. Polytheism, Classical Monotheism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Deism, and Polytheism exhaust the major categories. As such, interfaith dialog often revolves around specifics within each type, like two people debating whether a garden apartment is in a basement or actually on the first floor, or the degree to and means by which a particular type of God makes itself known.
