But again with 'suppression ' here you seem to be suggesting ideas of God can't just die out. They have to be squashed. Why?
Its the null hypothesis. Can't treat the god claim as a serious proposition until there is some evidence for it.
-
-
yeah that's the mistake. Neither theism nor atheism are actually null hypotheses. Atheism is not merely a claim about ontology.
-
You're too vague. Can't have a discussion if you won't say what you mean. Gods might exist. No good reason to think so.
-
That's my position. I don't know what you call it. But not endlessly arguing whether or not good exists. Moved on.
-
*God. You seem to have a problem with 'atheism' but can't say what atheism is. James also has a problem with it but does.
-
The claim that God does not exist.
-
See, that's so simple. To you, an atheist is one who claims God does not exist. I am not an atheist then & neither is James.
-
But I presume you do affirm the claim. That would make one an atheist.
-
No, Gods might exist but there isn't enough evidence to make it a serious proposition yet. How wld I know gods not to exist?
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
But u can still engage with books with all kinds of premise. Not every book abt religion has to rehash 'does god exist' arg
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.