RE: The Bible made me an Atheist.
August 9, 2009 at 5:34 am
(This post was last modified: August 9, 2009 at 5:35 am by Oldandeasilyconfused.)
Quote:So I am not allowed to believe in a god that exists in old books, and I am not allowed to believe in a god that doesn't exist in old books. I mean, if I told you that I believe in Yahweh or Krishna, then you would be OK with it? I doubt it.
No mate,I've never said that.I really,truly don't care what you believe. You need no one's permission to believe whatever you want. I do however,reserve the right to reject any belief whatsoever presented to me without evidence.
From reading many of your posts I get the impression you struggle with the meaning of the word "'evidence". People here [rightly] attack your claims when you fail to produce supporting evidence and demonstrate woolly thinking. (which is often) From what I can tell,most of us are not being deliberately mean or unjust.
Faith is not an acceptable reason for me to believe a thing. For me religious beliefs have an even greater burden of proof than many scientific claims. As Carl Sagan said "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs"
ON EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF:
Quote:Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Giving or procuring evidence is the process of using those things that are either a) presumed to be true, or b) were themselves proven via evidence, to demonstrate an assertion's truth. Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof.
Burden of proof
Quote:Main article: Burden of proof
The burden of proof is the burden of providing sufficient evidence to shift a conclusion from an oppositional opinion. Whoever does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption. Whoever bears the burden of proof must present sufficient evidence to move the conclusion to their own position. The burden of proof must be fulfilled both by establishing positive evidence and negating oppositional evidence.
The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation to shift the assumed conclusion away from an oppositional opinion to one's own position. The burden of proof may only be fulfilled by evidence.
The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges." This is a statement of a version of the presumption of innocence which underpins the assessment of evidence in some legal systems, and is not a general statement of when one takes on the burden of proof. The burden of proof tends to lie with anyone who is arguing against received wisdom, but does not always, as sometimes the consequences of accepting a statement or the ease of gathering evidence in its defence might alter the burden of proof its proponents shoulder. The burden may also be assigned institutionally.
He who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
