Quote:
Originally Posted by activeco
I surely support the idea behind this statement, but I dispute the term "atheism" used here and elsewhere.
|
As I earlier noted, one must make the distinction between atheism and agnosticism.
To declare that something does not exist, merely owing to the fact there is no proof of its existence, is a logical fallacy; in such case, the best that one can say is that no conclusion can be drawn from the evidence or lack thereof.
Hence, I hold myself to be an agnostic, rather than an atheist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by activeco
I am afraid this is a senseless question. The same applies here.
If there is no Golden Calf, Xenu, Blue Cosmo Sparks...why are we here?
If you still insist, you can also ask a classical question: Why does God exist? Any answer to that can be applied to the existence of anything else.
|
Quite correct; the question as framed is itself fallacious, as it assumes facts not in evidence, i.e., that existence presupposes a particular and special type of cause.