Well if its about burden of proof here then....
I didn't think that making a second claim would shift the burden of proof from the first claim....
If the first claim isn't remotely backed up and is closer to the truth then I thought that the burden of proof would still be on the first claim...
If science doesn't fit into the equation and this is just a philosophical debate and this is just about logic...
Then I guess an atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer by committing a logical fallacy right? Because its just about the arguments so the fact there's a massive claim with no evidence and the burden of proof is on that claim - then that wouldn't matter...
If the atheist commits a logical fallacy in the matter of a debate just about philosophical arguments and completely excluding truth, evidence, the burden of proof and science, etc - then the atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer JUST as easily right?
So if they lose the debate or argument then that's meaningless in the sense they could just have easily lost to someone who believes in Zeus or the FSM!
The Christian God is not to be regarded as any more special than Zeus...so it doesn't really matter who 'wins the debate' if the atheist could just have easily lost to a pastafarian who genuinely believes in the FSM.....
Lol.
EvF
I didn't think that making a second claim would shift the burden of proof from the first claim....
If the first claim isn't remotely backed up and is closer to the truth then I thought that the burden of proof would still be on the first claim...
If science doesn't fit into the equation and this is just a philosophical debate and this is just about logic...
Then I guess an atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer by committing a logical fallacy right? Because its just about the arguments so the fact there's a massive claim with no evidence and the burden of proof is on that claim - then that wouldn't matter...
If the atheist commits a logical fallacy in the matter of a debate just about philosophical arguments and completely excluding truth, evidence, the burden of proof and science, etc - then the atheist could lose to an FSM/Zeus believer JUST as easily right?
So if they lose the debate or argument then that's meaningless in the sense they could just have easily lost to someone who believes in Zeus or the FSM!
The Christian God is not to be regarded as any more special than Zeus...so it doesn't really matter who 'wins the debate' if the atheist could just have easily lost to a pastafarian who genuinely believes in the FSM.....
Lol.
EvF
