Fundamental Arrogance in Christianity

[Angrboda]

Now the second question is whether the default assumption should be in favor of any given proposition or not. That depends on whether the belief is properly basic. In the case of the proposition "God exists" I believe that qualifies as properly basic. Nearly everyone has some apprehension of the sublime and ineffable. These are naturally attributed to the divine whereas to attribute those experiences to something else requires justification.

Attributing them to the divine requires the same justification. You don't get something for free just because there exists a tradition of attributing it to the divine. There also exists a tradition of not attributing it to the divine.

In inferential statistics, the term "null hypothesis" is a general statement or default position that there is no relationship between two measured phenomena, or no association among groups.[1] Rejecting or disproving the null hypothesis—and thus concluding that there are grounds for believing that there is a relationship between two phenomena (e.g. that a potential treatment has a measurable effect)—is a central task in the modern practice of science, and gives a precise criterion for rejecting a hypothesis.

The null hypothesis is generally assumed to be true until evidence indicates otherwise.