(July 11, 2012 at 12:13 am)Skepsis Wrote:(July 10, 2012 at 11:22 pm)Jeffonthenet Wrote: How so?
If you embrace the idea that lack of evidence isn't a reason for lacking belief in a proposition, then by virtue of that idea you necessarily accept any proposed postulate.
I have studied logic a little and I would disagree.
1. The absence of evidence isn't always evidence of absence
2. Therefore I must accept all God claims (catos "proposed postulate")
How does 2 follow from 1?
