My Take on the Burden of Proof
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-10-2012, 11:57 AM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 04:24 AM)Marco Krieger Wrote:  You say, if i as an atheist try to convert a thiest, the burden of proof is on me, right?
And vice versa?
I think, if this is the case, i am all in with that.

I'm not all in with that, and judging by what you wrote after this bit I'm quoting, I am fairly sure you are not either.

It's in your signature - you can't convert an Olympic athlete to be a non-football player. You can't convert a theist to be a non-theist (atheist).

What you can do is invalidate their proofs, their arguments, their claims in favor of their football playing or theism. That doesn't involve making your own claims in favor of non-football playing or in favor of atheism. You simply undermine their claims and let them find new proof or, maybe, change their minds about what they have been claiming.

But I think you know this, so I posted this for other readers.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aseptic Skeptic's post
22-10-2012, 12:13 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 11:57 AM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  But I think you know this, so I posted this for other readers.

At last, someone understand me, what a heartwarming feeling, that's cute.

Humor out, you are right, i go for his analogy that both trying to convert the opponent.
And i stated, that atheist not doing such things.
So, we agree, right?

If atheism is a religion, then not playing football is an Olympic discipline.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 12:26 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof



"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Buddy Christ's post
22-10-2012, 12:43 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
i agree with chas

When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's relativity.

You cannot successfully determine beforehand which side of the bread to butter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 12:50 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
That's a great video Buddy C., I haven't seen it before. Nothing new to me, but it's well thought out, organized, and understandable. I will have to file that one away for future use, to whip it out on those "prove your atheism" idiots.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 12:54 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 11:09 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(22-10-2012 04:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  He who makes a positive claim bears the burden of proof.

Yes, but depending on whether you are a strong atheist, or weak atheist depends on whether you are making a positive claim or not. You can do the same for a Theist, though people usually don't. In a given conversation both or neither could be making a positive claim. Then what?

I am an atheist. I lack belief in any gods because there is no evidence of their existence. I am making no positive claim.

A theist claims there is a god. OK, support the claim with evidence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:15 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 12:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-10-2012 11:09 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Yes, but depending on whether you are a strong atheist, or weak atheist depends on whether you are making a positive claim or not. You can do the same for a Theist, though people usually don't. In a given conversation both or neither could be making a positive claim. Then what?

I am an atheist. I lack belief in any gods because there is no evidence of their existence. I am making no positive claim.

A theist claims there is a god. OK, support the claim with evidence.

Yes, I get your position, but you have not addressed the other position which I have raised.

Strong Atheist: I believe there is no such thing as a god.
Weak Theist: I do not have a disbelief in a god. Now atheist, support your claim.

See?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:27 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 01:15 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Strong Atheist: I believe there is no such thing as a god.
Weak Theist: I do not have a disbelief in a god. Now atheist, support your claim.

See?

A "strong atheist" and a "weak theist" would both have burdens of proof, because they are both making claims. To claim with absolute certainty that there are no gods is just as irrational as claiming there are, regarding DEIST gods anyways. But in respects to the Judeo-Christian God of Abraham, you can absolutely be a strong atheist, because you can disprove all the assertions for his existence put forth in the Bible, ie. you can disprove him.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:35 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 01:27 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  
(22-10-2012 01:15 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Strong Atheist: I believe there is no such thing as a god.
Weak Theist: I do not have a disbelief in a god. Now atheist, support your claim.

See?

A "strong atheist" and a "weak theist" would both have burdens of proof, because they are both making claims. To claim with absolute certainty that there are no gods is just as irrational as claiming there are, regarding DEIST gods anyways. But in respects to the Judeo-Christian God of Abraham, you can absolutely be a strong atheist, because you can disprove all the assertions for his existence put forth in the Bible, ie. you can disprove him.

I will quibble with both of you.

I believe there are no gods because there is no evidence of existence. I bear no burden of proof because I make no positive claim.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:43 PM
RE: My Take on the Burden of Proof
(22-10-2012 12:43 PM)Xinoftruden Wrote:  i agree with chas

Because you are an intelligent and perceptive person. Yes

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: