If negative cannot be proved

[exchemist]

You missed my point. What I was calling meaningless is an unspecified and unconsidered assertion about what one does or does not believe. People say these things all the time, and the people they say them to have no idea what they mean by saying it because it's never clarified, neither in the mind of the one making the statement nor in the mind of one hearing it.

"I don't believe in Bigfoot."

What does that even mean? I have no idea how much or how little the person making this statement has considered this question, or to what extent he has researched the possibility. It's just an empty negation, or a frivolous comment, apparently.

I think I grasped your point. I just think you are wrong. To say "I don't believe in Bigfoot" means nothing is incorrect, in my view. Its meaning may not be precise, but most people would take it to mean: "I don't buy this particular "crypto-zoology" idea of an undiscovered hairy hominid living in N America", or something along those lines. It has meaning all right, even though you may have to ask further questions to tie it down to your satisfaction.

 

[paarsurrey]

You missed my point. What I was calling meaningless is an unspecified and unconsidered assertion about what one does or does not believe. People say these things all the time, and the people they say them to have no idea what they mean by saying it because it's never clarified, neither in the mind of the one making the statement nor in the mind of one hearing it.

"I don't believe in Bigfoot."

What does that even mean? I have no idea how much or how little the person making this statement has considered this question, or to what extent he has researched the possibility. It's just an empty negation, or a frivolous comment, apparently.

I agree with one.
When a believer says "I believe in G-d", he has a specified Being in his mind, he may provide further details about Him if asked.
When a non-believer says in his response "I don't believe in God" that is the denial of that specific God only.

Regards

 

[Milton Platt]

then why get into such an irrational position in the first place?
Regards

____________
Isn’t Atheism a world view without reasons and arguments?
Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist "
Is Atheism a claim to the nature of reality and the universe?
"There is nothing that atheism (on its own) claims is 'right.' "?
"Atheist can't be an Anti-theist & Anti-theist can't be an atheist"?
With new observations comes a new belief
It is very natural to believe

I don't understand the question. What position are you talking about?

 

[Milton Platt]

How opaque? The parameters need to be set, and quantifiable, or else we're just speculating, not proving.

Opaque means light does not transmit through it, otherwise it would be transparent or translucent.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Because it's a safe place to hide while you attack the positive.

Hide from what?

 

[columbus]

When a non-believer says in his response "I don't believe in God" that is the denial of that specific God only.

That is very rarely true.
Usually when a non-theist says "I don't believe in God", they mean that they find the concept of a supernatural, sentient, entity Creator so implausible that it can easily be dismissed. Not your specific God image, the whole concept.
Tom

 

[LuisDantas]

then why get into such an irrational position in the first place?

You will have to explain me what you are talking about.

 

[Willamena]

If negative cannot be proved, then why get into such an irrational position in the first place?

Negative can be proved.

 

[Willamena]

The comment refers to the fact that the nonexistence of something might be impossible to prove.

Especially as non-existence doesn't exist.

 

[paarsurrey]

Especially as non-existence doesn't exist.

Please elaborate one's point of view. Did one agree with the poster one responded to, please?
Regards

 

[PureX]

I think I grasped your point. I just think you are wrong. To say "I don't believe in Bigfoot" means nothing is incorrect, in my view. Its meaning may not be precise, but most people would take it to mean: "I don't buy this particular "crypto-zoology" idea of an undiscovered hairy hominid living in N America", or something along those lines. It has meaning all right, even though you may have to ask further questions to tie it down to your satisfaction.

It's still just empty negation, in that it contains no reasoning at all, no specificity, and no relevance to anything but the speaker's (so far, empty) opinion. It's devoid of any pertinence while it invites misunderstanding on the part of the hearer. It's an expression of lazy and self-centered thinking.

And yet we hear people say things like this all the time as though they've said something significant, and relevant. And I suspect we have all done so, ourselves.

 

[PureX]

I agree with one.
When a believer says "I believe in G-d", he has a specified Being in his mind, he may provide further details about Him if asked.
When a non-believer says in his response "I don't believe in God" that is the denial of that specific God only.

But that can only be so if the responder understands what "God" the believer is proclaiming his belief, in. Yet we hear this response all the time, not only prior to the respondent finding out what "God" the proclaimer is believing in, but very often in advance of the proclamation all together. As when one proclaims their "unbelief" in god, categorically.

 

[james blunt]

But that can only be so if the responder understands what "God" the believer is proclaiming his belief, in. Yet we hear this response all the time, not only prior to the respondent finding out what "God" the proclaimer is believing in, but very often in advance of the proclamation all together. As when one proclaims their "unbelief" in god, categorically.

 

[james blunt]

God told me this, use this wisely.......God come'th to me and spoke softly in my ear the words of

A 3 wheeled car needs front wheel drive.....going around in circles is just not practical.

The cross of Jesus pulls the negativity towards it and cast these words upon the negativity, I command you to move for thy opposite is my attraction.

Negativity bent down towards Jesus's cross and the negativity pulled back .

 

[exchemist]

It's still just empty negation, in that it contains no reasoning at all, no specificity, and no relevance to anything but the speaker's (so far, empty) opinion. It's devoid of any pertinence while it invites misunderstanding on the part of the hearer. It's an expression of lazy and self-centered thinking.

And yet we hear people say things like this all the time as though they've said something significant, and relevant. And I suspect we have all done so, ourselves.

No, it's just a statement. With a meaning.

Expansion on the reasons is something the speaker should be able to give on request.

 

[james blunt]

No, it's just a statement. With a meaning.

Expansion on the reasons is something the speaker should be able to give on request.

Of course Mr C, because Einstein told me this.

 

[james blunt]

 

[paarsurrey]

You will have to explain me what you are talking about.

My comment was specific with the position/no-position of such Atheists who just hold that "negatives cannot be proved" and then refuse to give any evidence, reason and arguments . I believe that friend LuisDantas is not such person, please.

Regards

 

[Willamena]

I agree with one.
When a believer says "I believe in G-d", he has a specified Being in his mind, he may provide further details about Him if asked.
When a non-believer says in his response "I don't believe in God" that is the denial of that specific God only.

Regards

There is a slight difference in that we have personal beliefs. The believer may believe in a specific god and the unbeliever in another--the two are not necessarily related.

 

[Willamena]

View attachment 22410

This is intriguing.

Can you explain?