Quote:
Originally Posted by heurisdick
But on this particular topic, I don't think the burden of proof in on a person who's just saying they're willing to venture past strict empiricism and explore the possibility of a god. I think the burden of proof is on you for wanting them to completely disregard it as a complete lie, or as harmful to even pursue.
|
I would agree with you, had Repug been the first person ever in the world to come upon this revolutionary insight. He's more than welcome to further probe philosophy, and I think it's a fine pursuit. I have every reason to expect that he will fail at finding God, though (and am honestly surprised this has ever been an issue for him, given his staunch public rejection of religion in the past), but may eventually convince himself, as has most of the population of the world, without any proof whatsoever.
Quote:
|
Besides, they're plenty of things we take on faith with no qualms everyday. Prove your family actually loves you. I know, lame example. But dismissing every abstract idea until it's proven to you can be very depressing.
|
Props at least for acknowledging it was a lame example -- as are most faith comparisons. Yes, I have faith that the bus will show up on time, and I have faith that my family loves me -- all based on an enormous amount of evidence. I also don't base my entire life, let alone attempt to dictate the lives of everybody else on the planet based on my faith in the bus schedule or my family's love.