Its the null hypothesis. Can't treat the god claim as a serious proposition until there is some evidence for it.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
yeah that's the mistake. Neither theism nor atheism are actually null hypotheses. Atheism is not merely a claim about ontology.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ZeroIssueVoter
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ZeroIssueVoter
That's my position. I don't know what you call it. But not endlessly arguing whether or not good exists. Moved on.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ZeroIssueVoter
*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.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @ZeroIssueVoter
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
But I presume you do affirm the claim. That would make one an atheist.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ZeroIssueVoter
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?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
oh Good. Agnosticism. More intellectually honest. Wonder why so much militating on theism though.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Militating on theism? Have you read James' book? He doesn't think 'theism' is meaningful. No-one thinks of self as theist.
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.