The stupidest arguments against the most potent atheist argument?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-08-2017, 04:00 AM
RE: The stupidest arguments against the most potent atheist argument?
(13-08-2017 10:22 AM)Summer Wrote:  The most potent argument against them which usually deters them for miles is the argument that they don't have evidence for anything they claim. But there are an increasing number of numnuts who either find offense of that statement or even show that they have some answer to it that should either substitute for evidence or evidence it itself.

The most common ones are like when they say "Not everything needs evidence" or "All religion teaches good". What are some ways to respond to them? and also what are some other ways stupid people try to answer the above unbeliever argument of lack of evidence.

There are two responses that occur to me regarding things that do not need evidence. First, if the claim is so trivial that nobody cares whether it is true or not, e.g., 'Lucius Cornelius Scipio Asiaticus was left-handed' then evidence does not really matter either way. Second, non-trivial claims without evidence are indistinguishable from delusions. Applying Occam's razor makes delusion the more likely position.

The good things taught by religions are a subset of the total; it is not difficult to find examples of truly dreadful actions performed in the name of, or explicitly mandated by, religious teaching. Atheists can do the same things, both for good and ill, but we can't avoid taking responsibility on ourselves.

“I am not responsible for actions of the imaginary version of me you have inside your head.” - John Scalzi

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Norm Deplume's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: