buckobro wrote:Objection: Although the conclusion is correct, the premise is not. Invisible unicorns do not exist NOT simply because of a lack of evidence but because such things are logically impossible, the same way a square circle is impossible.
I think it's a pretty equivalent comparison, at least if you're talking about a theistic idea of God such as found in Christianity. What's the big difference?buckobro wrote:To say that people who believe in God are "equally" illogical as those who believe in oxymoronic concepts such as the invisible pink unicorn is ridiculously hyperbolic.
First, I don't know of anyone who claims to steadfastly believe that our Big Bang was just one of infinitely many. That's one idea, there are others, and I haven't heard of anyone being committed to any of them.Many smart people have imagined the energy that makes up the universe to be eternal and that our Big Bang was just one of an infinite number of big bangs that happen all the time. But these claims are merely figments of the imagination. No proof, only fantasy, just like God.
If I ever come across a hard atheist, I'll try to get a handle on his laziness level. So far, I haven't met one.Hard atheism is intellectual laziness
buckobro wrote: While pink unicorns have no explanatory power to life's hardest unsolved mysteries, the God concept offers some, although small, hope. The multiverse argument, too, is explanatory.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest