Faron, do you mean 'The point is that the belief in the existence of "God" is given validity only because it has a lot of history behind it"? Certainly valid from a social perspective, but not so much from reason. The number of people believing or not believing in something doesn't seem to have much relationship to its actual truth or not. Conversely, the Pythagorean Theorem has a lot of history behind it, but that's not what gives it it's validity.
The rest of that argument seems to be citing lack of positive evidence, which as I've mentioned, is not evidence against.
Your criticism is of Agnosticism as being fence-sitting bullshit I still don't understand. Since you say can't prove a negative, why would you take a radical position ( Atheism ) to criticize another radical position ( Theism ).
From your arguments I'd wind up an Agnostic I think.
__________________
The Ancient Ranger
Awake again.
|