(August 3, 2014 at 5:08 pm)frasierc Wrote: I don't think the null hypothesis analogy is that persuasive.
Generally? Or only regarding god claims?
(August 3, 2014 at 5:08 pm)frasierc Wrote: The way some use this argument I think effectively presumes naturalism - but from your earlier post I think you may have a more nuanced position.
What would be that nuanced position that you suspect I hold, please, and what is your evidence for suspecting it?
Regarding the question of what constitutes evidence, well that would depend on the claim, wouldn't it? Can you imagine a courtroom scene in which the counsel for prosecution asks the defence counsel what evidence she'd accept?
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'