• Isoprenoid@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Careful, many online atheists don’t understand that they have to prove a negative. That they have to prove the assertion: “There is no god.”

    The default position is that there is yet insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion.

    Edit: Thank you for the downvotes, you have provided me with further evidence that online atheists don’t understand that they have to prove a negative. Your butthurt fuels me.

      • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        You have made the assertion, thus you have the burden of proof.

        “what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence” QED

          • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I wasn’t arguing for the existence of god.

            Let me break this down:

            • “There is a god.” --> Burden of proof
            • “There is no god.” --> Burden of proof
            • “Hey, man. I don’t know.” —> No burden of proof
            • Communist@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The second one is wrong, there is no god is not a claim that requires evidence in the same way there are no fairies in my fridge doesn’t require evidence