Let’s Stop Calling New Atheism, “Atheism,” and Start Calling it What it is: Anti-Theism

[cbayer]

147. So, the bottom line is that you don't really have the evidence that

you claim exists and your reason for that is that you can't prove a negative? Do I have that right?

So if you can't prove a negative, my suggestion would be that you stop claiming that you have evidence that something does not exist.

BTW, pretty much all logicians and mathematicians state that you certainly can prove a negative. There are lots of great articles on this if you are interested. The meme (credit to Dawkins) is one that is often stated in order to avoid the responsibility of defending a definitive statement about their not being a god, but it's a false position.

If you are a gnostic, the burden of proof if on you. You can spend all day putting together the reasons why you think that there is no god, but you will not be able to provide any evidence. In the end it is just your opinion, or dare I say, your belief.

I am not at all interested in engaging in a debate about whether god exists or not. My position is basically apatheism. I don't know if there is a god and I don't care. Whether there is or not would change nothing about my life. I don't care if others believe in a god or not, as long as their position is not used to harm others.

Your treatise tells me only one thing and that is that you have reached your own conclusions and have your own ideas. Nothing wrong with that, but I think your conclusions are yours and are no more valid than those who have reached other conclusions.

Are you wickerman's wife? If so, please say hi to him for me.