RE: I can feel your anger
July 8, 2012 at 10:01 am
(This post was last modified: July 8, 2012 at 10:07 am by CliveStaples.)
(July 8, 2012 at 7:40 am)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: I have no belief.
So you don't believe that disbelief is the proper response to a lack of evidence?
But you just said that "a lack of evidence" is a valid reason to "disbelieve". Why would you say something you don't believe?
(July 8, 2012 at 7:52 am)Napoleon Wrote: There is lack of evidence for bigfoot, thor, the loch ness monster, leprechauns, unicorns etc but I guarantee you don't feel the need to believe in them do you.
No, but I'm not the one who claims only to believe things that have sufficient evidence.
Quote:Not believing in something due to lack of evidence is the only rational position to take.
*edit* and yes, it isn't a belief as Norfolk said, it's a lack of belief.
Let's just get this straight, so there isn't confusion:
You guys are saying, "For any proposition p, if p lacks evidence then you shouldn't believe p." Call this proposition E (for Evidentialism).
Now, the "lack of belief" is with regard to p--you seem very keen on pointing out that lacking belief in p doesn't mean that you have some other belief.
But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about your belief in E.
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”