29 May '15 04:24>2 edits
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemThere isn't any evidence? Isn't any evidence contingent upon whether or not the atheist has actually seen or acknowledged presented evidence, or can the presumption of no evidence trump actual evidence?
I think for some people it IS a belief. They are convinced there are no gods. Others take a more cautious stance of 'there isn't any evidence" or even "there isn't enough compelling evidence."
To me, it makes no difference whether you call it 'disbelief' or 'belief in not-G'. In both cases, G has been negated in the person's worldview.
And if someone says the evidence isn't compelling enough, doesn't this really mean for them the evidence is not compelling? Why would atheists want to consider or give any credence to (legitimate) evidence that contradicts what they believe?
YouTube : Mere Atheism