(September 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm)frankiej Wrote:(September 9, 2012 at 4:38 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: how will this atheist stack up against formidable theists who are philosophically and scientifically knowledgeable?
That is a problem for that atheist alone. If he isn't well read or scientifically knowledgeable then he probably won't argue about such things.
You seem to think one has to be smart to be an atheist, that just isn't true.
And a theist can have all the philosophy and science behind them, they still won't be able to show evidence for the existence of their god.
The problem is not so much evidence for the existence of their God. Keep in mind that's not the only criteria. It's also (a) warrant for theistic belief, ie "is theism rational", (b) rational superiority of theism "is it better to be a theist than an atheist", and © warrant for atheism "is atheism rational".
At the end of the day, the question is whether theism, rationally ought to be rejected. And if we have the two-bit intellects representing the face of atheism, we can make no meaningful "ought" statements like that.
