Theists think atheists make unreasonable assumptions which beg the question against belief and close their minds to evidence which might actually exist given that God specifically wants belief to require faith.
Which, possibly excluding the assumptions being unreasonable, is true.
I think the opposite, theists are making assumptions lead them to an unlikely to be true conclusion.
Invisible pink unicorns and reformed epistemology provide a similar symmetry.
It seems obvious to atheists that belief in God is relevantly different from belief in the external world, or structural scientific realism. And I’m fairly sure I can prove they are sufficiently different.
Theists think belief in God is different from Russel’s Teapot, and have semi reasonable arguments for why that is so.
BTW FSM is different from Russel’s Teapot. The FSM is a particular version of a transcendent double omni. That you can’t rigorously show the FSM is the wrong double omni is not evidence there is no double omni.
Also the absence of pirates is not causing global warming, that graph looks like some guy just made it up in less than a minute as a joke.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized
. Bookmark the permalink