RE: Agnostic Atheism? Your opinions..
November 21, 2011 at 5:14 pm
(This post was last modified: November 21, 2011 at 5:14 pm by Anymouse.)
(November 21, 2011 at 4:52 pm)Rayaan Wrote:Certainly one can devise an experiment to show the non-existence of something or some property.
The only requirements are that it be repeatable and falsifiable. If it cannot be falsified, the evidence is generally held to be true. Thought experiments count here as well.
Take a bowling ball. The ball is solid, and occupies a certain amount of space. Now force a cube into it, anyway you can imagine (God should be able to do this), without displacing either any matter of the bowling ball or the cube, such that both occupy the same space.
If God is omnipotent, this violation of physical laws should be trivial. We cannot do this however, and we do not need to be agnostic about it. We know it is impossible, not because we have proved it is impossible (we tried to force all cubes into all bowling balls and failed), but because given physical conditions show the theory of "two objects can occupy the same space" is easily falsifiable.
We have no evidence of any two physical objects occupying the same space at the same instant. This lack of evidence is sufficient proof to show it cannot happen, at least sufficiently that I do not need to be "agnostic" about the theory of two objects occupying the same space.
Now, if someone wants to make the extraordinary claim that two objects can, they are free to do so, but the onus of proof is on them. I am under no requirement to remain agnostic about it until all cubes and all bowling balls have been tested.
-James.
"Be ye not lost amongst Precept of Order." - Book of Uterus, 1:5, "Principia Discordia, or How I Found Goddess and What I Did to Her When I Found Her."
