Re: Did you "Choose to Believe," or "Choose not to believe"?

In article
<e8096835-0a5b-48d3-a6fe-0d848c6f861b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 <cazayoux@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

   [...]

>I don't think I was asking you to believe in god since there is not
>evidence that he doesn't exist.
>I was only asking how someone could 'believe' there is no god, when
>there is no evidence to sup****t that there is no god.

Isn't one of the attributes of "god" supposed to be omnipresence and
another detectability? If so, there is evidence there is no such
thing.

The absence of intervention also provides (weak) evidence in favor of
the proposition that no such thing exists, just as the lack of
blood-spatter evidence provides evidence that no murder was committed
in your house while you were out this morning.

>As logical as an athiest is in saying there is no proof of god, I
>would expect the same person to say there is no proof of the absence
>of god.

Depends entirely on what "god" is supposed to mean. While absence of
evidence is not dispositive evidence of absence, in many situations
the absence of evidence constitutes valid evidence in favor of
absence. 


-- 
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
 what I accept as reality."
    --- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
======================================================================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org