(January 2, 2014 at 2:32 pm)FreeTony Wrote: It's all just shifting the burden of proof. I lack belief in the supernatural, but I also can lack belief in the claim "The supernatural does NOT exist". I'm therefore not assuming anything in regards to the supernatural.
So so many people can't get their head around "I don't believe claim A" is not the same as "I believe claim B" where A and B are the only options.
Whereas we find the idea of "supernatural" to be a meaningless concept, do you think "natural" is too ambiguous? Could this be where their arbitrary distinctions are born from?