Burden proof is coupled with burden to listen.

[Mystic]

Red-herrings, trying to divert the topic. Nothing new. At least admit, like other Atheists have, the proposition is fair.

[chimp3]

Red-herrings, trying to divert the topic. Nothing new. At least admit, like other Atheists have, the proposition is fair.

You are confusing the word "burden" with "obligation". They are not always synonyms. When I say you have the burden of proof, I am not obligating you to argue further. If you find meaning and joy in your argument, do proceed.

[Mystic]

Red-herrings, trying to divert the topic. Nothing new. At least admit, like other Atheists have, the proposition is fair.

You are confusing the word "burden" with "obligation". They are not always synonyms. When I say you have the burden of proof, I am not obligating you to argue further. If you find meaning and joy in your argument, do proceed.

Even in that case, there would be no point of proceeding if you aren't willing to listen. It would be meaningless and serve no purpose.

Isn't it kind of weird that no one emphasizes on the two sides of this? That you guys always talk about the burden on believers making a case to prove their case, but you never looked at the side of being receptive and sincere listeners.

It can be one or the other, or both. If there is no proof and you are bad listeners, you won't even know that non-proof is non-proof, because you wouldn't know if the proof was a proof, it's al confusion when one is not sincerely listening.

Anyways, I got to use my time wisely. I think this thread has served it's purpose.

[chimp3]

You are confusing the word "burden" with "obligation". They are not always synonyms. When I say you have the burden of proof, I am not obligating you to argue further. If you find meaning and joy in your argument, do proceed.

Even in that case, there would be no point of proceeding if you aren't willing to listen. It would be meaningless and serve no purpose.

Isn't it kind of weird that no one emphasizes on the two sides of this? That you guys always talk about the burden on believers making a case to prove their case, but you never looked at the side of being receptive and sincere listeners.

It can be one or the other, or both. If there is no proof and you are bad listeners, you won't even know that non-proof is non-proof, because you wouldn't know if the proof was a proof, it's al confusion when one is not sincerely listening.

Anyways, I got to use my time wisely. I think this thread has served it's purpose.

I have already stated I may be willing to listen! But I am not obligated. This logic would result in two people ensnared in an endless circular argument with no freedom to move on!  Don't you love freedom, MK?

[Mystic]

You can get technical. But you know what I mean. The person asking for knowledge of the proof should strive to understand or otherwise, just admit they don't care and don't want to know.

[chimp3]

You can get technical. But you know what I mean. The person asking for knowledge of the proof should strive to understand or otherwise, just admit they don't care and don't want to know.

Do you believe in the Flat Earth ?

[Whateverist]

If a person tells a person they have a burden proof and the person ought to bring, it's very simple to understand this: likewise there is burden for the person being presented the proof to listen attentively and sincerely and seek to understand the other side fully, not just to bicker.

Lest those without proof are equated with those upon proof, and lest, conjecture is equated with what logic and reason proves and lest the deceivers who manipulate people are equated with the true guides and leaders.

That seems fair.  Hope I haven't asked you to shoulder any burden of proof because I don't really care about such things and sure don't want to wade through any 'proof'.

[Anomalocaris]

If a person tells a person they have a burden proof and the person ought to bring, it's very simple to understand this: likewise there is burden for the person being presented the proof to listen attentively and sincerely and seek to understand the other side fully, not just to bicker.

Lest those without proof are equated with those upon proof, and lest, conjecture is equated with what logic and reason proves and lest the deceivers who manipulate people are equated with the true guides and leaders.

No.

There is no burden to listen.  There is only additional burden upon he with the burden of proof to first so comport thselves as to suggest to others that there could exist some non-zero possibility that he could conceivably produce a proof sufficient to warrant a moment of anyone else's time.

You failed. but steeped as you are in the bullying and conniving ways of your hollow yet cravenly greedy and unscrupulously domineering religion, you seek to impose on others a burden of consideration you could not earn.

[Mystic]

If a person tells a person they have a burden proof and the person ought to bring, it's very simple to understand this: likewise there is burden for the person being presented the proof to listen attentively and sincerely and seek to understand the other side fully, not just to bicker.

Lest those without proof are equated with those upon proof, and lest, conjecture is equated with what logic and reason proves and lest the deceivers who manipulate people are equated with the true guides and leaders.

That seems fair. 

Thank you. Won't comment on Apatheism which is off-topic.

[Ravenshire]

I have done so, I have in detail proved this

Only to yourself.