- 03 Mar 2017 15:27
#14781760
You are late to the party indeed. You demonstrate a complete lack of philosophical sophistication by demanding that I must demonstrate the non-existence of an unfalsifiable claim. Bertrund Russell, Karl Popper, and Carl Sagan have all written about this topic and have explained why the strength of a claim is greater if it is falsifiable, not if it is unfalsifiable. I suggest you go and read what they have written so you get yourself up to speed on this.
Atheism is falsifiable. There are plenty of ways that you could demonstrate that God exists. You could demonstrate the existence of miracles. If Christ were to return here today and perform miracles in front of the whole world, that would easily show that God exists.
Furthermore, I HAVE given a positive argument for atheism, and so I HAVE met my burden.
I need not respond since it is not the contention of mine that something does - but, rather, that you can't demonstrate it doesn't and, for that reason, your argument fails.
You are late to the party indeed. You demonstrate a complete lack of philosophical sophistication by demanding that I must demonstrate the non-existence of an unfalsifiable claim. Bertrund Russell, Karl Popper, and Carl Sagan have all written about this topic and have explained why the strength of a claim is greater if it is falsifiable, not if it is unfalsifiable. I suggest you go and read what they have written so you get yourself up to speed on this.
Atheism is falsifiable. There are plenty of ways that you could demonstrate that God exists. You could demonstrate the existence of miracles. If Christ were to return here today and perform miracles in front of the whole world, that would easily show that God exists.
Furthermore, I HAVE given a positive argument for atheism, and so I HAVE met my burden.