(October 2, 2013 at 3:48 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: Honestly, I don't have a problem with that, because we're willing to change our minds if such evidence shows us to be wrong.ok fine, just know the fact that you commit a fallacy to reason the proposition means you can't call it a rational one.
Quote:Are you willing to change your mind about God if it could be proved that he doesn't exist?yes, I follow the truth wherever it leads. I don't think God is infallible as a proposition, though I've never seen any evidence against God. on top of that, he has more explanatory power than naturalistic explanations for the origin of the universe. and there are several other arguments that have me convinced.
Quote:There are an infinite number of things I don't believe in that all have no evidence for their existence. The number is only limited by human imagination. Doesn't mean I'm wrong for not believing in all of them.
as I said before, it's fine to not believe. but to oppose as a default position is irrational. neutral skepticism is the rational default.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo
-Galileo