Reply #120: "universally accepted definition of evidence" argument is not enough [View All]

[papau]

in metaphysics

If we insist on playing in metaphysics then it would help if we agree that neither side has the luxury of not needing to "prove" its position. Indeed the "universally accepted definition of evidence" is a discussion point ina metaphysical discussion.

Perhaps if I say that there is no scientific proof of God that is available to those that demand reproducibility on demand, nor a "need" for God beyond the need in the world of BIG BANG - and feel free to deny that the beginning of existence requires anything, but if you do please allow me to laugh at your explanations about how existence began - then we would have agreement?

If so, I so state!

:toast:

:-)