Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!shark!chrism
From: chrism@shark.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: No Willing Atheists?
Message-ID: <660@shark.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Mar-84 23:37:47 EST
Article-I.D.: shark.660
Posted: Wed Mar 28 23:37:47 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Mar-84 03:01:10 EST
Sender: chrism@shark.UUCP
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 40


>....Atheism is as much a leap of faith as is Theism.  The inability
>to produce evidence for Theism is no proof for Atheism.  On the face of
>absolutely no evidence, the best you can be is an Agnostic (maybe He is, and
>maybe He isn't).  The burden of proof is on both the Theist AND the Atheist,
>or at least should be, from the Agnostic's point of view.
>
Divine Statement:

	"Somewhere betweem the orbit of Mars and Jupiter floats a
	jelly-filled donut with apricot frosting (yech!)."

I presume three responses to this assertion:

1: You're crazy, there is absolutely no evidence for that donut existing
   out there in the asteroid belt.  I don't believe it. (Atheist).
2: Well, it can't be proved one way or another, so I guess I'm just
   undecided. (Agnostic).
3: I believe you're right, yes, that jelly-filled donut really is spinning
   away out there in the cosmos.  (Believer).

#3 (the believer)  actively agrees with the assertion.  #1 actively
disagrees, but offers no similar assertion in its place (e.g. there may
not be a donut out there, but Ill bet you there is a Hostess twinkie).
That is, he is not making or postulating anything - he is just disagreeing.
This, it seems to me, does not require a great "leap of faith".
Further, the burden of proof should always lie with the individual
making the postive assertion, rather than the one who does not make that
assertion in the first place.  Thus, in science, the burden of proof
lies with those advancing the hypothesis, as opposed to those criticising
the hypothesis.

Personally, I think I agree most with Buddha's observation on this
question.  Also, I don't label myself an atheist, and in fact,  wonder
if labels of this type have any meaning anyway.  But, I thought this
donut analogy might provoke some interesting and hopefully more
tasteful commentary.(:-).

Chris Minson