Religion only remains beyond the realm of human experience by constant retreat as human experience expands.
The problem with claiming inability to logically dismiss religion based on the ever-retreating goalposts is twofold:
1) you're then unable to logically dismiss *an infinite number of other things* for which there is no evidence 2) you're incorrectly conceding that there is a need for a positive assertion of falsehood.
You don't have to explain why they're wrong, whether they're talking about God or about the invisible stair-dwelling people who love you very much but watch you when you poop. They have to explain why they're *right*, and, when the explanation fails to provide even the slightest evidence, you have a rationa *obligation* to disregard their hypothesis.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-07-10 10:20 pm (UTC)The problem with claiming inability to logically dismiss religion based on the ever-retreating goalposts is twofold:
1) you're then unable to logically dismiss *an infinite number of other things* for which there is no evidence
2) you're incorrectly conceding that there is a need for a positive assertion of falsehood.
You don't have to explain why they're wrong, whether they're talking about God or about the invisible stair-dwelling people who love you very much but watch you when you poop. They have to explain why they're *right*, and, when the explanation fails to provide even the slightest evidence, you have a rationa *obligation* to disregard their hypothesis.