Neri » November 21st, 2017, 10:12 am wrote:As to the existence or non-existence of God, you say that there is “ultimately no objective evidence either way.” This implies that if one denies the existence of God, he has the burden to prove that God does not exist. This is like saying, “I am right to believe in fairies because you cannot prove that fairies do not exist.”
No one is obliged to prove a negative. He who makes a positive assertion of the existence of a supernatural being has the burden of proof. Nothing can be clearer than this.
Ah yes, the old "I am right by default" argument and "only you have a burden of proof for what you believe because my belief is special." I am not buying this special pleading garbage and this tactic of demanding that only others bear all the burden of proof is the very essence of an argument from ignorance.
Your belief is not special and describing a belief as "negative" is purely relative. Any belief can be stated as either positive or negative relative to something else.
The burden of proof is indicated by the very meaning of the word "proof." It is what justifies an expectation that other people agree with you. Thus the burden of proof naturally belongs to ANYONE who expects other people to agree with them. Sorry but you do not get a pass on intolerance for the belief of others just because you think your beliefs are special.
No one is obliged to prove what they choose to accept as a personal belief, whether it is religious, dietary, medical, animal rights, or something else, as long as they harm nobody and do not trespass on same liberties and rights of other people. It is only those who insist that others accept their assertions who have the burden of proof. Nothing can be clearer than this.
I routinely defend the rationality of both theism and atheism, and show the logical inadequacy of proofs either way. Belief with regards to things where there is no objective evidence is a matter of choice. And your choice with regards to the question of God's existence is no different than anybody else. It is not "special" and does not come with any free licence to be intolerant of the choices of others.
The most you can do is distinguish between objective and subjective beliefs as I do all the time. Beliefs in God are in the same category as beliefs in fairies, aliens, the healing power of crystals, OR the belief that such things do not exist. There is no objective evidence to support any of this. It is simply a choice. Life forces choices of preference on us all the time because for most things there is no proof or evidence and we simply have to decide how we are going to live our lives without it. This calls upon the rational and reasonable person to accept this diversity of thought as a fact of life.
But then there are always those who want to set themselves above everyone else and make a pretense that they are special and everyone else is stupid, ignorant, deluded, deceived, or in some other way out of touch with reality (as they decided themselves to be the authoritative judge of what that is). But insisting that theirs is the only right way to think is arrogant, intolerant and unreasonable. I suppose that is their prerogative too but if they do not keep it to themselves then the fact is that no matter what their excuses and special pleading they are not being reasonable, when the fact is they have no more proof of their beliefs than those they decide to look down on. Anybody can choose to be ill mannered, intolerant, unreasonable, arrogant, willfully ignorant, etc.. if that is what they want. I choose to be intolerant of intolerance and disapproving of the illogical, arrogant and willfully ignorant and I have as much a right to choose this as they have to be those other things.
I choose to stand in brotherhood with all the varieties of pygmies, aboriginal Australians, native Americans, Buddhists, atheists, Hindus, Wiccans, Jews, Muslims, agnostics, pagans, Sikhs, Mormons, Shamanists, Christians, Deists, Taoists, Shintoists, Moonies, Bahai, etc... and to respect their beliefs rather than laugh at them or otherwise treat them with any air of superiority just because my choice of belief happens to be different. I rejoice in the diversity of human belief as just as much an asset to human civilization as the diversity of our gene pool is an asset to the human species. Of course I think I am right in my beliefs just as they all do. In that I am not special, but just like them. But I will not indulge in special pleading and other dishonest excuses to set myself apart. I think that is both rude and unreasonable.
As to the existence or non-existence of God, you say that there is “ultimately no objective evidence either way.” This implies that if one denies the existence of God, he has the burden to prove that God does not exist.
Incorrect. There is no such implication except in your fantasies and dialogues with yourself. Those who deny the existence of gods, faries, aliens, ghosts, magical crystials, or whatever have no more burden of proof than those who choose to believe such things. All that is required is the acceptance of this diversity of belief and not indulging in the unreasonable expectation that other people follow along with your beliefs when you have no more objective evidence than they do.