Lack of Evidence

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
I don't believe in Satan, as I've seen nothing beyond bare claims that such an entity exists.

In this civilisation he remains hidden but in other civilisations I hear his existence is more obvious.

How does a bare unevidenced claim answer my assertion?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There can be physical evidence but not empirical in the sense that science wants.
None of the things you mention are empirical and are easily dismissed by people who demand empirical evidence..........................by people who don't want to have faith but who end up having faith in other things that aren't proven anyway.

They're dismissed because they're claims, not evidence.

But if any of those claims were supported by evidence, that evidence would also support the existence of God.

As for the distinction you're trying to draw between "physical evidence" and "empirical evidence," I get the impression that the only difference is rigor.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not necessarily it isn't, I'm an atheist, and my atheism is not a contrary belief or claim, just a lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities. I would not hold a contrary belief or make a contrary claim unless the claim had been falsified, and the generic claim a deity exists is unfalsifiable. I must remain agnostic about all unfalsifiable claims, but also disbelieve them.

I've no idea what you mean by "it all happened by itself"? What are you claiming happened by itself?



No it isn't, but you seem to be denigrating faith now, which is irrational given you champion it elsewhere?



One alternative yes, if a god concept is unfalsifiable then I would of course disbelieve it, as I would any unfalsifiable claim, though I would also have to remain agnostic about such claims.



I am an atheist as I don't believe in any deity or deities, however I also remain agnostic about all unfalsifiable claims, including any god claims.




Since I am an atheist how else could I live my life?



No it isn't, as I simply don't believe in any deity or deities, though of course other atheists may and some do hold a contrary belief. Atheism however is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, thus it encompasses both my lack of belief, and other's belief that no deity exists. This simple Venn diagram demonstrates it quite elegantly.

I think I said it before, but that Venn Diagram is awful.

Even setting aside the fact that the term "gnostic" already means something, and that this whole framework is hopelessly monotheism-centric, there are regions on the diagram that make no sense at all.

I mean, who is in the "does believe in God(s)" region but not in the "gnostic theist" or "agnostic theist" regions?

 

[Sheldon]

I think I said it before, but that Venn Diagram is awful.

Even setting aside the fact that the term "gnostic" already means something, and that this whole framework is hopelessly monotheism-centric, there are regions on the diagram that make no sense at all.

I mean, who is in the "does believe in God(s)" region but not in the "gnostic theist" or "agnostic theist" regions?

I actually wasn't reading it that way tbh, I was reading the area that doesn't overlap as just a generic labeller or collective for that group, which then split into two subgroups, but I see what you mean.