The universe is undoubtedly an extraordinary place full of extraordinary evidence but is Hitchens' razor an electric version of Occams?Given how much he's avoiding all the questions here, I refer back to what I said earlier.I don't understand how religion has spread as far around the world as it has. Surely any rational person applies Hitchens's razor and the Sagan standard as part of their evaluation when the concept of a god is raised?"
Hitchens's razor is "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". The Sagan standard is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Essentially between the two, the burden of proof is on you and you're going to need some remarkable evidence to justify supernatural claims.The universe is undoubtedly an extraordinary place full of extraordinary evidence but is Hitchens' razor an electric version of Occams?
Exactly so, if those asking these 'straight' questions have already made their minds up there's no possible answer they like but at least nobody can accuse you lot of trying to sound learned or intelligent. In fact it seems you've been taking lessons from Donald on incoherence too ;-)It's pointless arguing with religious people, they can never answer a straight question because it's impossible to provide evidence of the nonsense they believe, so they witter on incoherently, trying to sound learned and intelligent, making themselves sound more like Donald Trump.
You do realise you are making 'supernatural' claims too?Hitchens's razor is "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". The Sagan standard is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Essentially between the two, the burden of proof is on you and you're going to need some remarkable evidence to justify supernatural claims.
My first question would be to ask on what basis do you believe that the default position is "nothing", why is the default position not that things just exist?Anyway here's a question for you: "Why is there something rather than nothing"? Get your gums around that.
Hope she's smarter than her dad then, otherwise there's trouble ahead. I sometimes despair at the ignorance and prejudice on here. Incredibly sad and dangerous.My daughter just started high school in a CofE school, her first homework is RE, bloody hell the shite she is learning, really thise lessons could be best served with something useful. I’ve told her just do what you need to but other stuff has priority, this stuff should be outlawed now we are so called educated humans in the 21st century still adhering to made up nonsense from thousands of years ago, might as well teach them the tooth fairy still exists for fucks sake.
Absolutely not, my opinion is that there is no requirement for anything to have ever been created.You do realise you are making 'supernatural' claims too?
My mum bought my dad a razor from Hitchen's catalogue return shop in A-U-L circa 1984, he still has herpes and swears it was from using a second hand personal hygiene tool. My mum suggested he had caught it through other means, he dismissed her claims since she had no evidenceHitchens's razor is "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". The Sagan standard is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Essentially between the two, the burden of proof is on you and you're going to need some remarkable evidence to justify supernatural claims.
There is undeniably something and I prefer it to be meaningful rather than just a brute fact. The preference of most people I suggestMy first question would be to ask on what basis to you believe that the default position is "nothing", why is the default position not that things just exist?
My second, plus a couple of follow-ups, would be to ask if the default position for some reason has to be "nothing" and there has to be a creator to create the "something", where did the creator come from? Was there a creator of the creator? Why can "something" not just exist, but "creator" can?
You brought Occam's razor up yourself earlier, so I'll bring it back up with regard to the second question.