Posted: 14 August 2009 at 1:45pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by PhoeniXof_Hades
The one making up the claim is under the burden to prove it, not the one denying it. Since you cannot prove a negative, the burden of proof is on his shoulder who is making the claim, and not the other way around. Also, disbelief isn't a belief of its own - it's a state of mind. Atheism, too, isn't a state of belief, it's a state of being (that's highly debatable, though; if atheism isn't a state of belief, but the default position, then what state would agnosticism be? Would it be anymore logical to label the 'I-don't-know' position as the default one? Maybe I should go and start a new thread on that one).
I do not believe in the existence of Harry Potter, hence I am not under the burden to prove that he does not exist / disprove his existence (which, logically speaking, is impossible and makes no sense; the concept of disproving something, either a physical object or a hypothetical concept arises when there are sufficient evidences for it - evidence to the contrary are only provided when evidence for it are available). Rather it is those, who believes Harry to not only be a fictional character, but a real one, are the one's who needs to prove me otherwise before I disprove it. Also, disbelieving in Harry Potter to be real isn't a belief of its own, believing it to be real is what is. I do not need 'faith' to disbelieve in Harry's existence; though, the one making up the claim of Harry existing needs to.
*Excuse the bad analogy; just trying to make up a point
Along the same line, one is free to say God does not exist, and yet be considered as a person without any form of [religious/theological] belief[s] - so long as he does not close his mind regarding evidences to the contrary (close-minded, militant atheists
could be classed into the same position as the believers).
That is the only place where I disagree with WA.
Heck, I'm not an atheist, even if my lecture sounded highly atheistic.
Labib, you took my comment seriously. I was joking with Qwerty ji, obviously I do not expect him to disprove the existence of God or the need for religion.
And if I were to really attempt to prove the existence of God, then I will tell you now, that I couldn't do that. When I really want something, when I'm feeling down, when I feel lost, or even when I'm overtly joyful, I think of God. Perhaps its a means of comfort, or perhaps I am delusional, but I cannot help it. I like knowing that He's up there, somewhere, watching. And that's all that matters.
Anyways - you need to learn to take things more lightly, silly boy.