Quote from: pungopete468 on February 17, 2014, 06:20:01 AM

Quote from: organofcorti on February 17, 2014, 06:14:06 AM

Quote from: pungopete468 on February 17, 2014, 05:38:40 AM

I feel like this is one of those awkward debates where both of us actually agree on the topic at hand, yet we both use clever wording which forms a distinction between our points that allows the debate to actually continue...

I'll continue our little agreement/debate:

"I don't believe in God because I've seen no evidence a god exists" is along the same lines as making the assumption that X + 40 = 42. Unless you know the value of X you shouldn't consider your answer to be correct.

"I don't know if God exists, or in what manner or form God may or may not exist because I've seen no evidence a god exists" is comparable to saying X + 40 = Y. You don't know the answer so you leave it as a variable.

(X + 40 = 42) != (X + 40 = Y)

Atheism is a belief based on a lack of evidence and parallels religious belief.

No, I disagree.

"I don't believe in pink unicorns because I've seen no evidence pink unicorns exist"

Is this also a belief based on a lack of evidence and which parallels religious belief?

By the nature of your disagreement you've actually complimented my argument...

Have you observed all observable life within the Universe? Because we don't have pink Unicorns on Earth doesn't mean they don't exist. It simply means that we have never observed of a pink Unicorn on Earth.

Statistically, with the amount of time, energy, and matter available in the Universe, it's highly unlikely that a pink Unicorn has never existed anywhere within the Universe. In fact, it's plausible because you can envision what a pink Unicorn might actually look like should one exist.

In that case, how do you figure out what things exist and what don't? What level of proof do you need? Do you often carry a pink unicorn poop scoop just in case?

My point was that the statement is "pink unicorns exist" unable to be falsified unless a pink unicorn is detected. If a statement is unfalsifiable, then arguing its merits is pointless.

Unless you're religious, in which case unprovable somethings are the basis for an enjoyable afternoon's debate.