Atheism/Theism thread

[RB_Spirit]

Originally Posted by PaperclipGames

Logical flaw right there. Being unsure of the truth means that there is nothing you truly believe in; thus, basically, you believe in none of the things (where "believing in x" means "being convinced that x is true").

However, we have a list of possibilities what could be in the safe: a cloth, a paper, a bee's nest, nothing, and so on. We can label these options a_1, a_2, a_3...
Since you cannot look into the safe, you don't truly believe in any one specific a_i. However, we must acknowledge that at least one of the a_j must be correct: either one of the options is in it, or there simply is nothing in it. So, even without being able to look into the safe, you can believe something about the contents: you believe that "a_1, a_2, a_3, ... a_x is in it, or that nothing is in it" (by definition). This belief about the safe is based on the the common knowledge (belief?!?!) that a safe is capable of containing something in general. Again, the difference between disbelief and belief are (almost) non-existent.

Another example: I give you any random whole number. Do you believe it is even? Do you believe it is odd? You can't know until you look, so don't believe in any one specific (even/odd). However, you do believe that it either even or odd. So even without strict knowledge, it is possible to 100% believe.

I understand what you're point is, and now looking back at what i wrote, it definitely was a logical flaw. I typed it in such a hurry, overall, i meant that their is usually a belief when theirs a non-belief. And a non-belief IMO is a belief(Definitely depends on the scenario) and again, it's just my opinion. Not forcing it on anyone, simply acknowledging that it's clearly not based on factual evidence, just a, "Belief" i guess.