(April 25, 2014 at 10:54 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:(April 25, 2014 at 8:11 am)Tonus Wrote: I think the frustration is from the fact that god cannot be proven, and therefore the claim that he cannot be disproven is used to try to settle the matter. I think that in our day-to-day lives, for anything other than god and sports, we are willing to dismiss things that we cannot prove or disprove (I'm looking at you, "clutch hitting"). While the references to things like Santa Claus or unicorns are made semi-seriously, they do show that most of the time we easily reject such ideas on the basis that if you can't prove it, I don't need to treat it as anything but a myth.
As you say, he has no problem rejecting unicorns and leprechauns as myth, but doesn't seem to have any method to distinguish those mythological creatures from his mythological creature.
Frodo himself is guilty of the same dismissal of entities with no evidence, except his deity is protected by lapse in reasoning where it suddenly had to be disproven.
It's a simple reversal of burden of proof, due to cognitive dissonance, and the same magical thinking demonstrated by every superstitious belief in the supernatural worldwide.
I too have noticed that, that is often the case, I hear christians say all the time "cannot prove he doesn't exist" yet as you said none of those can be proven false either, But when we mention Flying Spaghetti Monster we are the crazy ones
