(August 6, 2009 at 9:32 am)Pippy Wrote: On the fact that I can't personally disprove it.
Um...kind of backwards?
You can't prove the absolute non-existent of anything! Does that mean that the FSM exists, that giant space monkeys exist? Thar spearmint flavoured multicoloured-tailed benevolent and at times malevolent grendels exist?
Isn't it more rational to require evidence for something first? No one can prove the FSM either....never mind you personally! Does that justifiy belief in the FSM, or, anything for that matter? Tooth farries? Unicorns? Hydras? Wyverns? Blah, blah blah, etc, etc.
Ever heard of the burden of proof?
If you have no evidence, it's not rational to believe right? If you have no evidence I wouldn't say it's rational to respond with 'On the one hand, I admit - there's no evidence. But on the other - I can't disprove it!'....riiiighttt...
Inability to disprove is not a good reason for belief, because it's completely backwards.
Well, that is - it's not a good reason for belief if you care about rationality, about evidence!
EvF
