I didn't know of his age and despite the fact it takes SOME faith I believe to claim that you KNOW (absolutely) that there is no God. I wouldn't say it's as bad as a Gnostic THEIST because God is extremely improbable and they are claiming he absolutely exists without any evidence whatsoever....
Since with Gnostic atheism...yes it's a logical fallacy and takes a bit of faith to believe that you 'KNOW' God doesn't exist - but I think the fact that the burden of proof is on the believer from outset because they have no evidence...and the fact that despite God isn't disproved as the Gnostic atheist believes he is......he's still EXTREMELY IMPROBABLE - so at least the Gnostic Atheist is much much MUCH more likely to be CLOSER to the truth than the Theist.
It's a logical fallacy to believe God is disproved. And so is it with the FSM though...
I think Dawkins put it well in an interview (to paraphrase) when the interviewer said that it takes just as much faith to believe there DEFINITELY IS no God than to believe there definitely ISN'T.
And Dawkins basically said how would it take just as much faith to believe that Zeus, the IPU, fairies and the FSM definitely don't exist? And how there are "A million things you can't DISprove"
So I'd say despite the fact it's an illogical fallacy to claim you KNOW there is no God....somehow I don't think claiming that is QUITE as absurd...
Just as I don't think saying you KNOW that there is no FSM or the IPU is quite as irrational as saying that you KNOW that there IS an FSM or IPU!!
No evidence that there is DEFINITELY no IPU/FSM (or God) sure....but since the burden of proof is on the believer and they are EXTREMELY improbable and COMPLETELY lacking evidence - I don't somehow; think it's QUITE as irrational or takes QUITE as much faith (at least) to claim that you 'KNOW' they definitely DON'T exist than it is to claim that you 'KNOW' that they definitely DO!
But yes, it's an illogical fallacy. I don't think it takes AS MUCH faith though or is AS irrational. You need evidence OF God/FSM/IPU first...and God, etc, is extremely improbable so he needs A LOT of evidence (or very hard evidence; or both).
EvF
Since with Gnostic atheism...yes it's a logical fallacy and takes a bit of faith to believe that you 'KNOW' God doesn't exist - but I think the fact that the burden of proof is on the believer from outset because they have no evidence...and the fact that despite God isn't disproved as the Gnostic atheist believes he is......he's still EXTREMELY IMPROBABLE - so at least the Gnostic Atheist is much much MUCH more likely to be CLOSER to the truth than the Theist.
It's a logical fallacy to believe God is disproved. And so is it with the FSM though...
I think Dawkins put it well in an interview (to paraphrase) when the interviewer said that it takes just as much faith to believe there DEFINITELY IS no God than to believe there definitely ISN'T.
And Dawkins basically said how would it take just as much faith to believe that Zeus, the IPU, fairies and the FSM definitely don't exist? And how there are "A million things you can't DISprove"
So I'd say despite the fact it's an illogical fallacy to claim you KNOW there is no God....somehow I don't think claiming that is QUITE as absurd...
Just as I don't think saying you KNOW that there is no FSM or the IPU is quite as irrational as saying that you KNOW that there IS an FSM or IPU!!
No evidence that there is DEFINITELY no IPU/FSM (or God) sure....but since the burden of proof is on the believer and they are EXTREMELY improbable and COMPLETELY lacking evidence - I don't somehow; think it's QUITE as irrational or takes QUITE as much faith (at least) to claim that you 'KNOW' they definitely DON'T exist than it is to claim that you 'KNOW' that they definitely DO!
But yes, it's an illogical fallacy. I don't think it takes AS MUCH faith though or is AS irrational. You need evidence OF God/FSM/IPU first...and God, etc, is extremely improbable so he needs A LOT of evidence (or very hard evidence; or both).
EvF
