XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: sylvia@not.at.this.address   
      
   On 8/12/2014 12:24 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   > On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 14:38:52 +1100, Sylvia Else    
   > wrote:   
   > .   
   >> On 1/12/2014 1:28 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>>>        Yes, why do billions of people believe for absolutely no reason?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's a question that's been asked many times here.   
   >>>   
   >>>       Has it ever been given a respectable answer? If so, what was it?   
   Here's a   
   >>> question that's been asked a number of times, but so far has never been   
   given a   
   >>> respectable answer:   
   >>   
   >> I think a respectable answer, or at least hypothesis, is that it's   
   >> explained by a mixture of human nature and the indoctrination of   
   >> children. This is not to say that it is necessarily the right answer,   
   >> but as long as it remains a reasonable possibility, nothing much can be   
   >> deduced from the fact that many people believe.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>       WHAT type of evidence do atheists think there "should be"? WHERE do   
   atheists   
   >>> think the evidence they beg for "should be"? WHY do atheists think it   
   "should   
   >>> be" to God's benefit for him to provide us with whatever particular   
   evidence   
   >>> they keep whining about?   
   >>   
   >> It's hard to know, a priori, what kind of evidence there might be.   
   >   
   >      You people seem to believe there should be some. Let's start with why   
   you   
   > think that is, and maybe from there we can get to what you think it should   
   be.   
   > Try to figure out why you think there should be some and where you think it   
   > should be.   
      
   It is not my position that there should be some. My position is that if   
   there is none, then there's no more reason to believe in God than there   
   is a reason to believe in anything else for which there's no evidence.   
      
   So, from my perspective, if you want to say that there's a better reason   
   to believe in God than to believe in something else, then you'll have to   
   provide some evidence.   
      
   Yes, it's possible that God exists, but systematically avoids providing   
   evidence for His existence. In that case, clearly, there will be none.   
   But in that case, even though, ex hypothesi, God exists, the question   
   remains why believe in God rather than something else.   
      
   >     If there truly were no reason there would be nothing to believe in.   
      
   Why? What's to stop people from believing in something for no reason?   
      
   Sylvia.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)