(June 27, 2013 at 8:54 pm)Rationalman Wrote: You don't understand the burden of proof do you?
I do.
Quote: You are making a positive claim that a god exists
Yup, and you are making the positive claim that naturalism and materialism are true.
Quote: we are reacting to it by saying: we don't believe you.
Yes, because of your naturalism and materialism.
Quote: If we said that a god doesn't exist, then the burden of proof would be on us.That’s what atheism means. “Atheism is the position that affirms the non-existence of God. It proposes positive disbelief rather than mere suspension of belief” - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Quote: I make this claim to you: unicorns exist. However i don't give any evidence for their existence. In fact, since you obviously don't believe me that unicorns exist, I tell you to prove that they don't.
Do you see how ridiculous that is?
Unicorns (which is also the name of older Scottish currency, so they do in fact exist
) are material creatures that we have a neutral position for examining their existence from. God is not material, and there is no neutral ground to determine whether He exists or not from so a person must either assume He exists beforehand, or assume He does not exist beforehand thus meaning the burden of proof is shared by both sides. Additionally, in debates where the topic is an interrogative such as “Does God exist?” both sides of the debate share the burden of proof. The positive claim/negative claim way of looking at this issue is a gross oversimplification because any position can be stated negatively or positively.Can you prove your materialism?
