Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)

22. I don't know is a great answer when there is no evidence or logic to explain the unknowable.

Reply to rug (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 24, 2015, 10:16 PM

Oct 2015

Speculation is fun, though, and there's nothing wrong with that. I have my own speculations concerning our existence in this world. In my mind, my speculations are supported by logic but can never be scientifically proven.

If someone claims a god created everything, and they bring no negative religious baggage, then power to them. No harm in that, except for being wrong in my view.

We don't know what type of existence our universe came from. Random place holders for our ignorance are not very useful, whether a god, or the unfortunate claim formerly made by many scientists, that our universe came from nothing. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and there is no evidence for either of those claims.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

My atheism does not make me superior to believers. It's a leap of faith too [View all] rug Oct 2015 OP

The article's title is wrong: as far as unprovable claims go, unbelief is more rational than belief Yorktown Oct 2015 #1

You should read beyond headlines. rug Oct 2015 #6

Atheism does not confer superiority, but theism confers inferiority Yorktown Oct 2015 #16

Lol, therefore those superior to theists are . . . .? rug Oct 2015 #17

Atheists are the default position, an average bunch of Joes and Janes Yorktown Oct 2015 #18

No, they're not. (And it's atheism, not atheists.) rug Oct 2015 #21

"there is no burden of proof for the unprovable" is a cop-out Yorktown Oct 2015 #23

I still think that reality has some advantages over make-believe. immoderate Oct 2015 #2

How does the lack of knowledge of the unknown or the unproven establish reality? rug Oct 2015 #7

The default position for random claims about the unknown is disbelief. cpwm17 Oct 2015 #8

There is no default position. There is no burden of proof for the unprovable. rug Oct 2015 #9

Ignoring all of the good arguments against the existence of any god cpwm17 Oct 2015 #10

You could discuss a horse's pimple but I doubt you'd find many willing to argue that with you. rug Oct 2015 #11

I don't know is a great answer when there is no evidence or logic to explain the unknowable. cpwm17 Oct 2015 #22

There may not be. rug Oct 2015 #24

But there is a burden of proof about the comical holy books Yorktown Oct 2015 #19

You have not read post 11, have you? rug Oct 2015 #20

Same "leap of faith" that prevents me believing in werewolves. immoderate Oct 2015 #12

Except werewolves have measurable traits. rug Oct 2015 #13

Oh really? immoderate Oct 2015 #14

Remus Lupin told me. rug Oct 2015 #15

"Leap of faith"? bvf Oct 2015 #3

Yep... haikugal Oct 2015 #4

More like leaping OVER faith (nt) Autumn Colors Oct 2015 #5