(August 10, 2013 at 11:58 am)Maelstrom Wrote: Would it appease you if I lumped god in with all the other fairy tales, including unicorns, leprechauns, phoenixes, Zeus, Snow White, Bambi, werewolves, vampires, yeti, the loch ness monster, extraterrestrials, the Easter bunny, the tooth fairy, Santa Clause? It is commonly held by the majority that those things do not exist. God can be held to the same standard.
I already answer that before. I will repeat it again in here with another similar example. I don't know whether some kind of sea monster (similar to Loch Ness Monster) exists or not in our universe (because there is no evidence either way), but I don't believe it. Why? One of the reason is because believing in the existence of that monster does not give any positive impact to me. On the contrary, there is a negative impact (e.g. make me feel scare when I'm on sea). Believing in God does give me overall positive impact as I said in my previous posts. That the reason *for me*.
So when I said that I don't believe in that monster, I have to give a reason (which I did above). If I said there the monster should be considered not exist simply because there is no evidence of its existence, then that's a false dilemma according to the article on Wikipedia.
You have not responded to my question. Do you agree with the article on Wikipedia that say that "If a proposition has not been proven, then it cannot be considered true and must therefore be considered false" is a false dilemma? Agree or not?
