Proof and evidence will always equal Science

[Mister Agenda]

Remember the "Do chairs exist?" thread? Whether you answer yes or no to that question, you accept some sort of metaphysical theory. As Bel points out, you can't prove a metaphysical theory with evidence... but you can make substantive logical arguments. So it's not dogmatic or anything.

I'm probably going to regret asking this, but are you saying that metaphysically speaking, chairs aren't evidence for the existence of chairs because physical evidence has no bearing on metaphysics?

---

Thank you for proving what I have been repeating in these boards for two years. God and the soul belong to a different category, you can't dissect the supernatural in a laboratory. And yet this is precisely what athests ask for when they drop their "give me evidence for God". It also became clear to me that there can't be deductive proof for the divine, because deductive reasoning is merely about logical consistency, it doesn't add information -let alone existence- to the premises.

So you know your theistic assertions are both unevidenced and unprovable, yet you keep trying to get skeptics to believe you and it's their failure if they don't buy what you're trying to sell?