Theists- do you believe without evidence?

[wwjs]

Evidence is necessary. I will note that "physical" evidence is not necessary, especially with things that... umm... aren't physical.

Ok, what is your non-physical evidence that Dawud for example wouldn't be able to give

[Dawud]

I believe what I know!

[wwjs]

Great, and so does Tex but only one of you is "correct", right?

[Tex]

Evidence is necessary. I will note that "physical" evidence is not necessary, especially with things that... umm... aren't physical.

Ok, what is your non-physical evidence that Dawud for example wouldn't be able to give

A totally coherent and logical system.

However, I'm not actually sure what you're asking. The "physical evidence" thing was more of a shot at Nony and Ryan. I'm making a lot of those today.

[wwjs]

A totally coherent and logical system.

I'm sure Dawud wouldn't agree but ok, bring it on.

[Ryantology]

However, I'm not actually sure what you're asking. The "physical evidence" thing was more of a shot at Nony and Ryan. I'm making a lot of those today.

What sort of effect is your self-deprecation supposed to have on us?

[Tex]

That isn't the topic of this thread, wwjs.

[Minimalist]

A totally coherent and logical system.

You can't mean jesus freakdom?

[Neo-Scholastic]

...you have chosen a worldview which satisfies what you wish to be true and which avoids accepting things you wish were not true....

The substance of my post includes you. You, Ryan, have made an equally irrational choice. Certain axioms are logically necessary for rational thinking. That does not mean the axioms we presuppose match what actually is. It could be that said axioms only maintain our false belief that we are rational.

For example, the ability to reason effectively depends on an inherently ordered reality. So belief in an ordered reality is logically necessary. Yet reality may actually be completely chaotic. In that case our reason is just a useless fantasy, hence absurdity.

Likewise, belief in libertarian free will is logically necessary for rational thought. But it could be otherwise. Yet perhaps you cannot actually alter the course of your thinking or subsequent behaviour. That makes you a puppet of forces beyond your control, hence fatalism.

And these are only two examples.

You are terrified of oblivion, so you gravitate towards a system which promises to help you avoid it.

You know nothing about what I fear. I gravitate to an intellectually consistent position that presupposes the ability to acquire knowledge, take responsibility for my own actions, make meaningful moral judgments, and provide justification for semiotic relationships between thought and reality.

I accept the world as it is, not how I wish it was.

Is that so? You are deluded if you believe you know the world as it actually is? As a philosophical position, atheism undermines any notion you might have that your view of reality is logically coherent.

[wwjs]

That isn't the topic of this thread, wwjs.

Want a different thread for it? I can start it for you.