Burden of Proof is on Atheists

[questfortruth]

Me: "Gnostic Atheists say that there is no God. Nevertheless, scientists have not come to this Atheism's claim. Are you smarter than scientists? Why doesn't science say there is no God?"

She: "Do I think that scientists are madder than me? Atheists do not do this. The one who claims must prove the claim and not vice versa."

Me: Atheists make a lot of claims. For example, they say there is no God. Does this phrase carry absolutely no meaning and no information? If it does, then they claim that there is no God. So, atheists do claim, and not only their Atheism claims. Atheists repeat the claims of Atheism.

If you don't like the atheists "No belief in God"....
It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

1. Most of humankind is perfectly sure, there is God. They even feel God and talk to God.
2. Most of humankind is not crazy.
This 1+2 is very strong evidence.

All theists are right in one dogma: There is God. Some theists, like Einstein, are wrong that the God is not a personal god; but they are right that there is God. Polytheists are right that there is God, but wrong about His quantity.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Me: "Gnostic Atheists say that there is no God, and scientists have not come to this. Are you smarter than scientists? Why doesn't science say there is no God?"

She: "Do I think that scientists are madder than me? Atheists do not do this. The one who claims must prove the claim and not vice versa."

Me: Atheists make a lot of claims. For example, they say there is no God. Does this phrase carry absolutely no meaning and no information? If it does, then they claim that there is no God. So, atheists do claim, and not only their Atheism claims. Atheists repeat the claims of Atheism.

A theist once told me that country music sucks and that the best music in the world is Motown.

I'd like you to defend this theistic claim. Why do theists hate country music? Why do theists like Motown so much?

 

[questfortruth]

country music

My favorites are:

 

[PureX]

There is no burden of proof regarding a subjective existential value judgment. Neither the atheist nor the theist is required to offer 'proof' for the conceptual choice they've made regarding the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that exists. No such proof is available, and if it were, we could not possibly verify it, anyway.

What we can offer each other are the reasons we chose the perspective that we have. These can stand as evidence, then, but not as proof.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Me: "Gnostic Atheists say that there is no God, and scientists have not come to this. Are you smarter than scientists? Why doesn't science say there is no God?"

She: "Do I think that scientists are madder than me? Atheists do not do this. The one who claims must prove the claim and not vice versa."

Me: Atheists make a lot of claims. For example, they say there is no God. Does this phrase carry absolutely no meaning and no information? If it does, then they claim that there is no God. So, atheists do claim, and not only their Atheism claims. Atheists repeat the claims of Atheism.

If you don't like the atheists "No belief in God" it is maybe time to just let them have their view.

I doubt you will be able to convert any of them

 

[Revoltingest]

Non-belief in gods requires non-proof.
I've been not proving my not believing for decades.

"Proof" is for people making claims of truth.

 

[questfortruth]

If you don't like the atheists "No belief in God"

It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

 

[Spirit of Light]

It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

Atheists find their truth through science, and it seems to make them content and satisfied

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My favorites are:

Seems like you missed my point.

 

[Revoltingest]

Atheists find their truth through science, and it seems to make them content and satisfied

I'm skeptical that "truth" even exists.
Science is merely a useful method
to operate in the natural world.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I'm skeptical that "truth" even exists.
Science is merely a useful method
to operate in the natural world.

I agree with you in this context i used "truth" just to differ between what OP starter said and what most atheists would say about science.

Personally I can't say I found the ultimate truth yet so maybe it is changing all the time?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

That's right. Atheism makes no claims.

Individual atheists may make all sorts of claims, but none of those claims are what make them an atheist, and the fact that two people are both atheists doesn't mean that they have to agree on any particular claim.

 

[blü 2]

Me: "Gnostic Atheists say that there is no God. Nevertheless, scientists have not come to this Atheism's claim. Are you smarter than scientists? Why doesn't science say there is no God?"

Because "God" has no definition meaningful in reality. We have no idea what real entity we'd be looking for, nor how to determine whether any real suspect is God or not.

So there's nothing to talk about.

The only manner in which God is known to exist is as a concept or thing imagined in an individual brain.

 

[We Never Know]

There is no burden of proof regarding a subjective existential value judgment. Neither the atheist nor the theist is required to offer 'proof' for the conceptual choice they've made regarding the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that exists. No such proof is available, and if it were, we could not possibly verify it, anyway.

What we can offer each other are the reasons we chose the perspective that have. These can stand as evidence, but not as proof.

Simply put....burden of proof is the responsibility of an individual or party to prove an assertion or claim that they have made.

If one says a god does exist, thats their claim or assertion

If one says a god doesn't exist, thats their claim or assertion.

Being neither can be known or shown,, That's the way I look at it.

 

[ChristineM]

It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

So provide new info (falsifiable evidence) that you god exist and voila, you will eliminate atheism at a stroke, be world famous and have the worlds religious leaders knocking your door doen to venetate you. Hell you would even have the popes speed dial on your phone.

And BTW it carries the information that the person has no belief in a god (ant god) existing. What more information do you want?

 

[PureX]

Simply put....burden of proof is the responsibility of an individual or party to prove an assertion or claim that they have made.

If one says a god does exist, thats their claim or assertion

So is saying that gods don't exist. The problem, here, is lack of clarification. Is one asserting their belief, or asserting a universal truth? If they are asserting their belief, there is no burden of proof required. If they are asserting something we all should accept as true, then they should be able to prove it.

Since the debate is almost always about our beliefs, as none of us can know the truth, burdens of proof are irrelevant.

 

[Revoltingest]

Saying gods don't exist is supportable by
observation of their not being observable.
It's not proof, but it's evidence against the
major sky fairies.

Did I mention that evidence isn't proof,
just evidence?

 

[We Never Know]

So is saying that gods don't exist. The problem, here, is lack of clarification. Is one asserting their belief, or asserting a universal truth? If they are asserting their belief, there is no burden of proof required. If they are asserting something we all should accept as true, then they should be able to prove it.

Since the debate is almost always about our beliefs, as none of us can know the truth, burdens of proof are irrelevant.

If one says a god doesn't exist, thats their "claim or assertion".

A persons can claim or assert something without having a belief.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Doesn’t most atheists say something along the line of.
I do not believe there is a God because there has not yet been given substancial evidence for it?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Me: "Gnostic Atheists say that there is no God. Nevertheless, scientists have not come to this Atheism's claim. Are you smarter than scientists? Why doesn't science say there is no God?"

She: "Do I think that scientists are madder than me? Atheists do not do this. The one who claims must prove the claim and not vice versa."

Me: Atheists make a lot of claims. For example, they say there is no God. Does this phrase carry absolutely no meaning and no information? If it does, then they claim that there is no God. So, atheists do claim, and not only their Atheism claims. Atheists repeat the claims of Atheism.

If you don't like the atheists "No belief in God"....
It carries no information. It is just definition of Atheism, which is simply "No God". No new info is presented by "No belief in God".

It was theists who started the whole thing to begin with by inventing God.